I freaking told you.

[Cool Spot]

To pile on ('cause that's how we roll) - I think the play call before the missed FG was questionable. I think it should have been another run to Oliviera, not a pass attempt.

* A run probably gains another 2-3 yards; yes, a completed pass gets a first down but...
* ... an incomplete pass stops the clock whereas a running play runs another 20-25 seconds off the clock...
* ... which is important because even had Wpg made that FG, they are only up by 2 points with ~45 seconds on the clock. Toronto could have taken the ball on the 35 (or is it the 40?) and would have needed a couple of first downs, or perhaps one big play, to get back into FG territory...
* ... and if Toronto would have kicked the winning FG with 0:00 on the clock, we'd be griping "Why didn't the Bombers manage the clock better?"

Of course, that's pure speculation. And perhaps even with a 2-3 yard gain on second down, Liegghio still misses that kick. But my point is that even if he would have made it, it's not necessarily true that would have been the deciding factor.

[Blue In BC]

To pile on ('cause that's how we roll) - I think the play call before the missed FG was questionable. I think it should have been another run to Oliviera, not a pass attempt.

* A run probably gains another 2-3 yards; yes, a completed pass gets a first down but...
* ... an incomplete pass stops the clock whereas a running play runs another 20-25 seconds off the clock...
* ... which is important because even had Wpg made that FG, they are only up by 2 points with ~45 seconds on the clock. Toronto could have taken the ball on the 35 (or is it the 40?) and would have needed a couple of first downs, or perhaps one big play, to get back into FG territory...
* ... and if Toronto would have kicked the winning FG with 0:00 on the clock, we'd be griping "Why didn't the Bombers manage the clock better?"

Of course, that's pure speculation. And perhaps even with a 2-3 yard gain on second down, Liegghio still misses that kick. But my point is that even if he would have made it, it's not necessarily true that would have been the deciding factor.

I thought the same thing for all the reasons you mentioned. However if they had completed the pass things may have worked out. When things don't work out for whatever reason we tend to question what seemed like bad decisions at the time. Sometimes it does work out but not always.

[theaardvark]

Yah not blaming the loss on Leggs, there were many contributing factors, but as it stands the Bomber kicking game is below championship caliber and needs to be improved.  It's vitally important they have an excellent kicker, without Castillos's perfect 5/5 performance in the 2021 GC, the Bombers do not repeat.  Again this game exposes Leggs weakness in pressure situation, he does not have the unshakeable confidence to perform at his highest level when the chips are down.

Regardless of the flubbed FG, punting and kickoffs were below average yesterday, field position is critical and in terms of yardage Leggs lost 15-20 yds. on every exchange with the 2 Argo kickers.  Maybe it's too much to expect an undersized athlete to do well in all aspects of the kicking game, the mechanics are very different for kicking and punting and Leggs is using a very short "driver" to try to achieve distance, while sacrificing accuracy.  Try driving a long-ball with a shorter club, there is a reason the #1 driver is the longest club in the bag.

The punt to the middle of the field that led to the Argos longest return is a also a gaff that hasn't received much attention, Leggs admitted post-game that his punt location was a mistake that should not have happened. 

Is punt location on the kicker, or the ST coach?  Becasue the whole return team needs to know the location before the kick.  If Leggs mishit the punt , that's a different story, but his directional punting has been very good hhis year, as has his K/O...

[Blue In BC]

Is punt location on the kicker, or the ST coach?  Becasue the whole return team needs to know the location before the kick.  If Leggs mishit the punt , that's a different story, but his directional punting has been very good hhis year, as has his K/O...

ST coach and game planning decide what the strategy will be. It can be more specific depending on the game situation. The punter/kicker tries to achieve what is requested.

On a punt, location or height might result in a shorter punt but allow better closing time on the returner. How often have we over heard that a kicker over kicked the coverage team? In theory you want the returner to not have time to get up to speed etc. etc

Teams will kick away from good returners and / or close to the sidelines in order to limit WHERE a returner can run. The risk is kicking an O/B resulting in a penalty.  Or an over kick going into the end zone when want the opponent inside their 10 yard line rather than gaining a punt.

Note that Grant allowed a punt to roll into the end zone for a point in the 1st half. That allowed us to field the ball in better field position which was more important than the point given up at the time. Score became 4 -0 IIRC. IIRC that you could just as easily say that single / decision cost us the game. IMO it was the correct decision with the Bombers going into the wind.

[theaardvark]

ST coach and game planning decide what the strategy will be. It can be more specific depending on the game situation. The punter/kicker tries to achieve what is requested.

On a punt, location or height might result in a shorter punt but allow better closing time on the returner. How often have we over heard that a kicker over kicked the coverage team? In theory you want the returner to not have time to get up to speed etc. etc

Teams will kick away from good returners and / or close to the sidelines in order to limit WHERE a returner can run. The risk is kicking an O/B resulting in a penalty.  Or an over kick going into the end zone when want the opponent inside their 10 yard line rather than gaining a punt.

Note that Grant allowed a punt to roll into the end zone for a point in the 1st half. That allowed us to field the ball in better field position which was more important than the point given up at the time. Score became 4 -0 IIRC. IIRC that you could just as easily say that single / decision cost us the game. IMO it was the correct decision with the Bombers going into the wind.

On the play that he downed it in the EZ, it was taken back due to penalty, and on the subsequent play, we did not surrender a rouge.  The rouge to make it 4-0 was a missed FG....

[theaardvark]

Just for jollies, I looked at Castillo vs. Legghio, Castillo was 2% better on  FG attempts (37/44 vs. 32/39), and Legghio was 2% better at PAT's (26/29 vs. 56/61).  cAstillo is INT, and doesn't punt or kickoff.  So, that's losing one DI and maybe swapping a global for a nat for the P spot.

I think Leggs vs. Castillo is a win for Leggs all things considered...

Leggs has 7 years to catch up to Castillo, each year he will get better, and more clutch.

[Blue In BC]

On the play that he downed it in the EZ, it was taken back due to penalty, and on the subsequent play, we did not surrender a rouge.  The rouge to make it 4-0 was a missed FG....

I forgot about the penalty. In any case the idea to surrender the point made sense at that point in the game going into the wind.

[longtimeblue]

 Well, fellow Bomber fans. Haven't been here for a while. As hard as it is to accept this loss, pinning it on our kicker is unfair.
Toronto simply played harder and executed better. Bomber offense couldn't convert on 2nd downs, didn"t give their QB time to make good reads and we saw the results. Collaros was fortunate he wasn"t picked off 2 or 3 more times. His accuracy trying to force the ball downfield was not good. I'm not sure why they attempted that so often. I thought that the shorter passing game was a better game plan. But, they often even couldn't convert on 2nd and short.
One sustained drive in the 4th quarter could have put that game away. They had many opportunities.

I don't know about you guys, but I saw this coming. There were a number of games this year where they really didn't move the ball consistently, but the defense kept them hanging in to pull it out at the end. A number of games where I thought they were not at their best, but found a way to win.

 When they blocked that kick, I thought they were going to do it again. Argos turned the tables. It was a team loss. This team, despite their stellar record, was inferior to last years.Toronto earned it. They were better.

[theaardvark]

Bede was 3/6 on FGA... 3 for freaking 6... and only got one single out of that...

Its one thing being 50% (1 for 2) and 50% (3 for 6)...

And he's an INT, and doesn't punt.

So, no, kicking game is not what decided the GC this year...

[longtimeblue]

To pile on ('cause that's how we roll) - I think the play call before the missed FG was questionable. I think it should have been another run to Oliviera, not a pass attempt.

* A run probably gains another 2-3 yards; yes, a completed pass gets a first down but...
* ... an incomplete pass stops the clock whereas a running play runs another 20-25 seconds off the clock...
* ... which is important because even had Wpg made that FG, they are only up by 2 points with ~45 seconds on the clock. Toronto could have taken the ball on the 35 (or is it the 40?) and would have needed a couple of first downs, or perhaps one big play, to get back into FG territory...
* ... and if Toronto would have kicked the winning FG with 0:00 on the clock, we'd be griping "Why didn't the Bombers manage the clock better?"

Of course, that's pure speculation. And perhaps even with a 2-3 yard gain on second down, Liegghio still misses that kick. But my point is that even if he would have made it, it's not necessarily true that would have been the deciding factor.

Agree. Play calling was suspect.

They needed to put together 1 scoring drive in the 4th quarter and they couldn't do it. Toronto pass rush was overpowering the O-line. How do you blame the kicker for a block?  Someone failed a blocking assignment.

We should also keep in mind that were it not for a fortunate face mask penalty, the game would already have been over. It was a team loss. And we were outcoached.

[elder]

Agree. Play calling was suspect.

They needed to put together 1 scoring drive in the 4th quarter and they couldn't do it. Toronto pass rush was overpowering the O-line. How do you blame the kicker for a block?  Someone failed a blocking assignment.

We should also keep in mind that were it not for a fortunate face mask penalty, the game would already have been over. It was a team loss. And we were outcoached.

We were definitely out-coached. Nevertheless, even if it hadn?t been blocked, that last FG kick would not have been successful.

[Pigskin]

To pile on ('cause that's how we roll) - I think the play call before the missed FG was questionable. I think it should have been another run to Oliviera, not a pass attempt.

* A run probably gains another 2-3 yards; yes, a completed pass gets a first down but...
* ... an incomplete pass stops the clock whereas a running play runs another 20-25 seconds off the clock...
* ... which is important because even had Wpg made that FG, they are only up by 2 points with ~45 seconds on the clock. Toronto could have taken the ball on the 35 (or is it the 40?) and would have needed a couple of first downs, or perhaps one big play, to get back into FG territory...
* ... and if Toronto would have kicked the winning FG with 0:00 on the clock, we'd be griping "Why didn't the Bombers manage the clock better?"

Of course, that's pure speculation. And perhaps even with a 2-3 yard gain on second down, Liegghio still misses that kick. But my point is that even if he would have made it, it's not necessarily true that would have been the deciding factor.

That's what we were saying at that time. Run BO20 or Purkup, get some positive yards and kill some more time. If you get the first down great, if not kick the FG, leaving them with very little time.

[Lincoln Locomotive]

To pile on ('cause that's how we roll) - I think the play call before the missed FG was questionable. I think it should have been another run to Oliviera, not a pass attempt.

* A run probably gains another 2-3 yards; yes, a completed pass gets a first down but...
* ... an incomplete pass stops the clock whereas a running play runs another 20-25 seconds off the clock...
* ... which is important because even had Wpg made that FG, they are only up by 2 points with ~45 seconds on the clock. Toronto could have taken the ball on the 35 (or is it the 40?) and would have needed a couple of first downs, or perhaps one big play, to get back into FG territory...
* ... and if Toronto would have kicked the winning FG with 0:00 on the clock, we'd be griping "Why didn't the Bombers manage the clock better?"

Of course, that's pure speculation. And perhaps even with a 2-3 yard gain on second down, Liegghio still misses that kick. But my point is that even if he would have made it, it's not necessarily true that would have been the deciding factor.

Precisely my point and I forgot to mention that the IC pass stopped the clock.    Time management in such a game is critical and we had plenty of time for Brady or Dakota to pound out another first down and kick at least from around the 40 on the last or next to last play of the game.   I was yelling at the TV at the time to keep running the ball and then the IC pass.   I think we just needed to be patient there and close out the game however it didn't pan out that way,   Coulda, shoulda, woulda!!

[Horseman]

To pile on ('cause that's how we roll) - I think the play call before the missed FG was questionable. I think it should have been another run to Oliviera, not a pass attempt.

* A run probably gains another 2-3 yards; yes, a completed pass gets a first down but...
* ... an incomplete pass stops the clock whereas a running play runs another 20-25 seconds off the clock...
* ... which is important because even had Wpg made that FG, they are only up by 2 points with ~45 seconds on the clock. Toronto could have taken the ball on the 35 (or is it the 40?) and would have needed a couple of first downs, or perhaps one big play, to get back into FG territory...
* ... and if Toronto would have kicked the winning FG with 0:00 on the clock, we'd be griping "Why didn't the Bombers manage the clock better?"

Of course, that's pure speculation. And perhaps even with a 2-3 yard gain on second down, Liegghio still misses that kick. But my point is that even if he would have made it, it's not necessarily true that would have been the deciding factor.

Your point #3 is incorrect, within the last 3 min of a game, after a field goal, the scoring team has to kick off. But prior to the last 3 min the team that had the FG scored against them can choose to scrimmage the ball from their own 40. Having said this though, Leggs kickoffs this year have not been good contrary to what Aardvark stated above. Leggs is only able to kick the ball to the opposition 20-25 yard line and Tor usually was able to return the ball to their 40-47 yard line. We may need to find a "kickoff" specialist who can pound the ball to within the 5 yard line for next year. The Tor kicker was able to get the ball to our 5 yard line which usually limited our return to our own 30-35 yard line.

[guyinfla89]

Help !!  We desperately need a new kicker.  Leggio choking cost us 2 games in 2022, including the big one.  Missed extra point cost us a chance to win in OT. 

Also, notice that he rarely kicks deep on kickoffs, which put the defense in a hole.  Leggio's  kickoffs rarely get deeper than than the 30 yd line.  Compare Bede who usually reaches the 5 or 10.  It's inexcusable to stick with a weak leg kicker who chokes on crucial converts.

Hello Justin Medlock.  If you have Coach O'Shea's cell #, he's waiting for your call.