Our special teams are bad

[Blue In BC]

Monday on the Coach's Show on CJOB a caller asked Mike O'Shea about the coverage teams. O'Shea acknowledged that the coverage teams have been below standard - he even threw out some stats about where the Bombers rank.

Coach O'Shea expanded further by stating that the Blue Bombers have been trying new coverage schemes this season vs. the schemes used (successfully) for the past few season. He says they are not there yet, with some kinks to iron out still - but they are close.


PFF had Jamieson Sheahan as their highest rated K/P for week 11  . PFF analyses each play and assigns a grade based on how well they think the player executed the play - raw stats don't factor in per se. I'm with the majority of people who are surprised by some of their rankings and this one is a head scratcher.

This week is game 11. That's a long time to experiment with schemes that are not working but " close ". Better field position for our opponents has put us in game that were closer and more fifficult than they should have been.

Hopefully it doesn't bit us in the butt and cost us a game.

Regarding Sheahan. Did O'Shea make any specific comments about him? I don't expect him to be harsh but did he mention needing to improve hang time, placement or distance? It all starts with the punter in setting up the coverage being successful.

[RebusRankin]

Monday on the Coach's Show on CJOB a caller asked Mike O'Shea about the coverage teams. O'Shea acknowledged that the coverage teams have been below standard - he even threw out some stats about where the Bombers rank.

Coach O'Shea expanded further by stating that the Blue Bombers have been trying new coverage schemes this season vs. the schemes used (successfully) for the past few season. He says they are not there yet, with some kinks to iron out still - but they are close.


PFF had Jamieson Sheahan as their highest rated K/P for week 11  . PFF analyses each play and assigns a grade based on how well they think the player executed the play - raw stats don't factor in per se. I'm with the majority of people who are surprised by some of their rankings and this one is a head scratcher.

PFF has some interesting data and observations but can also produce some real head scratchers. An example is they rated Orlando Brown fairly highly last year for KC despite him giving up a ton of pressure on Mahomes blind side.

[The Zipp]

Monday on the Coach's Show on CJOB a caller asked Mike O'Shea about the coverage teams. O'Shea acknowledged that the coverage teams have been below standard - he even threw out some stats about where the Bombers rank.

Coach O'Shea expanded further by stating that the Blue Bombers have been trying new coverage schemes this season vs. the schemes used (successfully) for the past few season. He says they are not there yet, with some kinks to iron out still - but they are close.


PFF had Jamieson Sheahan as their highest rated K/P for week 11  . PFF analyses each play and assigns a grade based on how well they think the player executed the play - raw stats don't factor in per se. I'm with the majority of people who are surprised by some of their rankings and this one is a head scratcher.

bottom 1/3rd?

[Blue In BC]

bottom 1/3rd?

It's a bit of a double edged sword. The kicking has not been good but neither have the cover teams. Too often the opposition returner seems to get a chance to get up to speed before the tacklers get close. It's almost the exact opposite for our returners.

So whether that's all on the kicker for not getting the hang time or placement the coverage players expect is not totally clear.

[TecnoGenius]

PFF had Jamieson Sheahan as their highest rated K/P for week 11  .

I'm pretty happy with Sheahan so far, and I like the experiment to see where it ends up.

With Sheahan you never know where the punt is going to go.  You can't tell by looking at his stance or angle or anything.  He'll drop that ball and kick it in some new way and it'll fly off at angles never before seen by mankind.  It looks so weird, especially watching it live.  I'll assume for now every wacky angle is deliberate and he's not just shanking them all.      So that might be part of it, as the (single) returner has no idea which way to cheat to.

I think he also has a knack for forcing the returner OOB or kicking it so it bounces then rolls OOB with no return.  Often the returner will get to it in time but their momentum carries them OOB.  That's also a function of tricking them so they don't have time to get under it and wait.

[3rdand1.5]

I'm pretty happy with Sheahan so far, and I like the experiment to see where it ends up.

With Sheahan you never know where the punt is going to go.  You can't tell by looking at his stance or angle or anything.  He'll drop that ball and kick it in some new way and it'll fly off at angles never before seen by mankind.  It looks so weird, especially watching it live.  I'll assume for now every wacky angle is deliberate and he's not just shanking them all.      So that might be part of it, as the (single) returner has no idea which way to cheat to.

I think he also has a knack for forcing the returner OOB or kicking it so it bounces then rolls OOB with no return.  Often the returner will get to it in time but their momentum carries them OOB.  That's also a function of tricking them so they don't have time to get under it and wait.

All of that is great if it translates to an advantage in field position, but so far it hasn't. As Osh said they are trying something new and still learning so some patience is required but so far it has not translated to great results in field position advantages.

[Blue In BC]

All of that is great if it translates to an advantage in field position, but so far it hasn't. As Osh said they are trying something new and still learning so some patience is required but so far it has not translated to great results in field position advantages.

The CFL is 100+ years old. I don't know what could be new scheme wise. You kick the ball and run downfield to tackle the returner.  The only thing that really changes is the personnel.

In the case of the Bombers we lost Hansen and Miller for the entire season to this point. Gauthier missed an extended period. We can't really tell what Sheahan is asked to do compared to what he does do. It does seem as though his hang time is not great and he's made some really bad kicks. He can improve but there are questions.

I have no doubt our ST's would be much better if those injuries had not happened.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

The CFL is 100+ years old. I don't know what could be new scheme wise. You kick the ball and run downfield to tackle the returner.  The only thing that really changes is the personnel.

In the case of the Bombers we lost Hansen and Miller for the entire season to this point. Gauthier missed an extended period. We can't really tell what Sheahan is asked to do compared to what he does do. It does seem as though his hang time is not great and he's made some really bad kicks. He can improve but there are questions.

I have no doubt our ST's would be much better if those injuries had not happened.

That explains a lot. 

[Blue In BC]

Fundamentals and execution. Montreal has a pretty good returner so this will be a good test to see if we can keep him under control. I don't really expect to see an improvement with our returns per se. That will be ok if we aren't seeing so many punts deep in our end. We've seen our offence in lousy field position to start so many drives. While a better return helps, it's more about forcing the opponent from having better field position as a starting point.

We aren't taking a lot of penalties on our returns but those we take seem to be at the worst time, deep in our own end!!  Clean up the act a bit and take what's there.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

The CFL is 100+ years old. I don't know what could be new scheme wise. You kick the ball and run downfield to tackle the returner.  The only thing that really changes is the personnel.

In the case of the Bombers we lost Hansen and Miller for the entire season to this point. Gauthier missed an extended period. We can't really tell what Sheahan is asked to do compared to what he does do. It does seem as though his hang time is not great and he's made some really bad kicks. He can improve but there are questions.

I have no doubt our ST's would be much better if those injuries had not happened.

I think O'Shea held an advantage for many years because he was one of the few coaches that took ST very seriously and recruited players specifically for their role.  Other CFL teams are now catching up as they realize ST is as important to game outcomes as the other two aspects of a team, and they're no longer just stocking it with whoever volunteers to participate, but are finding specialists.

[bunker]

As of week 11, we are bottom third in punting average (46.4 yards). We are second last in net punting yards (35.5). For comparison Montreal is first at 40.6. We are second last in punt return yards given up per punt (12.4). In case you thing this is just an issue with Sheehan, we are also second last in the number of yards we give up per kick-off, 24.8. Edmonton is first at 15.4, but they seem to pooch short kickoffs, so the next best team might be a better comparison, Ottawa at 18.9.

Based on this, we are not very good at STs. Compared to Montreal we give up 5 more yards per punt, and with an average of 13 punts per game, that is 65 yards we give up. If we were giving up 65 yards to other teams in extra penalties, O'Shea would have a fit. That doesn't even take into account the 5-6 extra yards per kickoff we lose compared to the better teams. It's actually a tribute to our O and D that our record is as good as it is.

In terms of what new things we are trying, I wonder if one is putting more emphasis on directional punting and less on hang time. Sheehan has had a number of punts that seem to drop right near the sideline. Its possible to get this degree of accuracy, you have to sacrifice some height. This is just speculation, but the numbers above are cold hard facts, and they don't paint a pretty picture.

[Blue In BC]

I am a little disappointed in the depth of our kick offs but the coverage is not great either.

Tonight will be interesting to see if getting Gauthier back makes any noticeable difference.

EDIT: Didn't really notice Gauthier and didn't see a great improvement on ST's.

[The Zipp]

I am a little disappointed in the depth of our kick offs but the coverage is not great either.

Tonight will be interesting to see if getting Gauthier back makes any noticeable difference.

EDIT: Didn't really notice Gauthier and didn't see a great improvement on ST's.

kickoff coverage was not great again.  Its pretty much a given the opposing team is gonna start at worst for them the 40 yard line.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

kickoff coverage was not great again.  Its pretty much a given the opposing team is gonna start at worst for them the 40 yard line.

On the other hand, for some strange reason Castillo was line driving them most of the game. There was like a 30 yard gap between the cover team and where Montreal was fielding it often. Cover team needs to cover but he wasn't exactly setting them up for success on a lot of kicks.

[The Zipp]

On the other hand, for some strange reason Castillo was line driving them most of the game. There was like a 30 yard gap between the cover team and where Montreal was fielding it often. Cover team needs to cover but he wasn't exactly setting them up for success on a lot of kicks.

that is true...maybe this is part of the "new" scheme...all i know is that we will lose field position when playing a team like Toronto who has a great returner (Leake) and a kicker that can boom them deep.