Official Game Day Thread - Grey Cup - Winnipeg & Toronto - Nov. 17, 2024

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Interesting info over on Lionbackers. Bombers were a man short twice including the Bissett TD. Nichols took a penalty when he touched the ball before the snap. That explains why he choose to do that.

Rotating so many players so often is bound to catch you sometime with too many or not enough.

This would be stunning if true, will have to look for it in the re-watch, could become infamous as the Bombers 11 man incident!

[Pigskin]

And Collaros was furious after that and I don't blame him. Everyone is blaming him for our poor offense, but if linemen are jumping offside the very first play and recievers running the wrong routes in the red zone, need say more. Wake the hell up boys, it was the grey cup you were playing in, this wasn't pre-season. You should be embarassed on your poor performance.

We should throw the streaker in there some place also. lol.

[theaardvark]

I think the team vastly underprepped for the game.  The practice schedule was a joke, and they looked unprepared from the start.  And zero in game adjustments, looked like they had Plan A and when that didn't work, they just kept to Plan A.

On another note. 

Arbuckle MVP?  Willie got 6 DT, 2 Sacks, 1 Forced Fumble and an INT.  Arbuckle had a m'eh game 250 yds, 2 td and 2 int.  I guess the winners always get the trophies.

Brisset MVC? I guess they had no other choice, no Canadian actually showed up.  Well, Brady did in the limited touches they gave him...

[Stats Junkie]

How could you have no idea?  He left game bleeding.

I didn't notice it in stadium - my focus was the ensuing FG attempt.

I heard about it in my headset from someone who saw the replay on TSN.

The 50/50 from the game has gone unclaimed. It's worth over $434K. Check your tickets!!!

It has now been claimed by Henry & Darin from Kamloops.

Arbuckle MVP?  Willie got 6 DT, 2 Sacks, 1 Forced Fumble and an INT.  Arbuckle had a m'eh game 250 yds, 2 td and 2 int.  I guess the winners always get the trophies.

Many Toronto fans and media feel Wynton McManis should have been Grey Cup MVP.

6DT, 1 Interception (58 yards), 3 knockdowns

I would accept that choice.

[TecnoGenius]

Arbuckle MVP?  Willie got 6 DT, 2 Sacks, 1 Forced Fumble and an INT.  Arbuckle had a m'eh game 250 yds, 2 td and 2 int.  I guess the winners always get the trophies.

Brisset MVC? I guess they had no other choice, no Canadian actually showed up.  Well, Brady did in the limited touches they gave him...

I knew instantly when it was clear we were going to lose that the MVP was Arbuckle and MVC Brisset.  No one else did anything.  Interesting stats on McManis, but he didn't do more than Arbuckle.  Arbuckle calmly making the right reads with plenty of time all night and only throwing up a "punt" INT was clearly the reason they won.  And doubly so when everyone expected him to be INT city.

As for Willie... can't give the MVP to the losing team.

[TecnoGenius]

We were up 10-9 at halftime. The Lucky fumble really turned things for us and then Zach getting hurt was pretty crushing.

The team was ready. The game was in the balance until the pick six late in the fourth. The offensive line in particular played a decent game against a really good defensive front. Collaros didn't deliver was the biggest factor though. Hurt hand or not.

No, if our team was ready and dialed in half as much as TOR was we should have been up 14+ at halftime, not tied.  It should have been a devastating blowout.  The fact it wasn't obvious we were better at the half gave TOR all the morale and momentum to seal the deal.

You could tell, no one on our sidelines believed we'd win after halftime.  I was watching them on the binoculars the entire game.  Everything was off, and nothing was going right at all.

[TecnoGenius]

sloppy foot control by kenny.

Finally got home and am doing my PVR watch now.  Will have notes.

Kenny was in-bounds for that catch.  I thought that live (binocs) and was very perplexed when they started moving the chains and everyone was like "this is a catch" and then Major announces "incomplete" after a long while and they move everything back.

I did my PVR tricks and it's not even remotely close: he was inbounds and tapped his toe in with lots of clear green.  100% a completion.

Does anyone know if it was the on-field refs ruling it incomplete or a call down from command?

The only thing you could possibly say is he did something with his other hand a bit after his heel comes down, but his one hand had it super secure and didn't move.  Based on all the CFL precedent I've seen, no one would call that a bobble and no one would call this incomplete.

You may think who cares it's early 1st Q, but just like the early Schoen whiff in the last GC, it sets the tone, and the early tone often governs the game (remember '19?).  And no way MOS can blow his challenge this early.

Also, when a REC "screws up", both Buck and Zach are quick to distrust them the rest of the game.  We've seen it time and time again.  Could explain all the Pokey attempts later.

Robbing us is one thing, but robbing us before we can get our rhythm going on a nice 20-25Y pass is severely aggravating and potentially game-killing.

[TecnoGenius]

2Q7:23 1st & goal, Zach rolls out right and ends up throwing out of bounds as the heat comes in and Kenny isn't terribly open.

I'm very confused what was going on in this play.  There was literally no other play other than Kenny for a 5Y pass.  Kenny is open for this pass for most of the play.  But Zach keeps running to the sideline, and faking a deep shot when there is no REC deep.  3 D's are chasing Kenny & Zach.

If Zach throws it earlier Kenny gets a guaranteed 5 and there are moments where he may have gotten the TD, with only 1 guy to beat.

Maybe Zach wanted Kenny to turn it up to the corner?

Just very bizarre, and very sloppy by everyone.  I wonder if there was supposed to be a deep route by someone else as a second option?

Another missed opportunity early, reinforcing the tone of our team in disarray.

Edit: OMG, the 2nd down play after is even worse.  Looks like a QB draw option?  Strange, as no one is clearing the flat and no way Zach can get 7Y on McManis.  He goes straight into the DL when the OL breaks down quickly.  Looks like Clercius didn't know he had to be on the line and screwed up the whole play.

What a stupid scheme for 2nd & goal at the 7.  Just horrific play calling.  We seem so intent on either bombing it or going for exactly the sticks.  You need to use the whole field Buck!  Layer the routes and options.

[bluengold204]

Finally got home and am doing my PVR watch now.  Will have notes.

Kenny was in-bounds for that catch.  I thought that live (binocs) and was very perplexed when they started moving the chains and everyone was like "this is a catch" and then Major announces "incomplete" after a long while and they move everything back.

I did my PVR tricks and it's not even remotely close: he was inbounds and tapped his toe in with lots of clear green.  100% a completion.

Does anyone know if it was the on-field refs ruling it incomplete or a call down from command?

The only thing you could possibly say is he did something with his other hand a bit after his heel comes down, but his one hand had it super secure and didn't move.  Based on all the CFL precedent I've seen, no one would call that a bobble and no one would call this incomplete.

You may think who cares it's early 1st Q, but just like the early Schoen whiff in the last GC, it sets the tone, and the early tone often governs the game (remember '19?).  And no way MOS can blow his challenge this early.

Also, when a REC "screws up", both Buck and Zach are quick to distrust them the rest of the game.  We've seen it time and time again.  Could explain all the Pokey attempts later.

Robbing us is one thing, but robbing us before we can get our rhythm going on a nice 20-25Y pass is severely aggravating and potentially game-killing.

You really don't know the rules... if any part of the foot in the first step of the catch touches out of bounds it's not a completion.  Doesn't matter if their toe comes in first then the heel out of bounds.  If any part of the first foot touches the white before the second foot it's out of bounds.  Which was the case on  the play.

[TecnoGenius]

You really don't know the rules... if any part of the foot in the first step of the catch touches out of bounds it's not a completion.  Doesn't matter if their toe comes in first then the heel out of bounds.

I've never once seen it called like that in 10 years of studying the CFL with my comp PVR.

Usually a toe is good enough, for instance all of the toe-dragging sideline plays (especially TDs).  In those plays the heel never comes down at all, and if it does, the heel is OOB by definition.  But those are called TDs all the time!

I've never heard anyone say you need the entire foot to be inbounds even when the first part to touch the turf is inbounds.  (Note: I have no idea what the standard in the NFL is, and I'm only going by what I see in the CFL.)

Then again, the backpedaling catch that Kenny was doing is not the normal situation, so maybe the case of toe in / heel out after is rare enough I haven't encountered it before.

As usual, the rule book appears to be somewhat ambiguous.  I see no rule that says toe-dragging OOB in the EZ is ok but what Kenny did is not.

P.S. Refs and command gave QB-Alexander a heel-on-the-sideline-is-ok earlier in the year on a run, but I guess no such luck for Kenny.

[Jesse]

I've never once seen it called like that in 10 years of studying the CFL with my comp PVR.

Usually a toe is good enough, for instance all of the toe-dragging sideline plays (especially TDs).  In those plays the heel never comes down at all, and if it does, the heel is OOB by definition.  But those are called TDs all the time!

I've never heard anyone say you need the entire foot to be inbounds even when the first part to touch the turf is inbounds.  (Note: I have no idea what the standard in the NFL is, and I'm only going by what I see in the CFL.)

Then again, the backpedaling catch that Kenny was doing is not the normal situation, so maybe the case of toe in / heel out after is rare enough I haven't encountered it before.

As usual, the rule book appears to be somewhat ambiguous.  I see no rule that says toe-dragging OOB in the EZ is ok but what Kenny did is not.

P.S. Refs and command gave QB-Alexander a heel-on-the-sideline-is-ok earlier in the year on a run, but I guess no such luck for Kenny.

It's called like that consistently, but it doesn't come up much and is a stupid rule.

If you toe tap and fall forward, it's a catch.

If you toe tap but you're in the position where you're falling backwards, so you're heel comes down, not a catch.

Stupid rule.

[dd]

The call on the Alexander run was the wrong call, as was noted in the telecast.

The rule has always been you have to have at least 1 foot in bounds, so if your foot straddles the line, you're out of bounds. If you're in the air and can only drag a toe, that's in bounds, its a catch. If you're in the air and your first foot steps out of bounds and then your second foot lands in bounds, you're out of bounds

[TecnoGenius]

Finally finished my full rewatch (been busy, long story).  Painful 2nd half of 4th Q, that's for sure.

After the MTL loss I said BE BOLD.  MTL won the game on 3rd & 3 by throwing it 15Y into man coverage.

4Q3:22 we're 3rd & 3 (down only 1 score) and what do we do?  A dumb 5Y curl to Demski that everyone saw coming as all of TOR is playing close to the line expecting a short pass or run.  The DB steps in front and gets a pick-6 and the game is sealed.

MTL won last year precisely because they didn't throw the expected short pass: they isolated a guy and trusted him to make the 50/50.  So they won.

Our short curls have stunk all season long.  Our super short game was perking up in 2023 but reverted back to hot garbage in 2024.  Why are we putting the game on this play?  You could say run it with Brady, but TOR was stopping the run by loading 6 in the box at that moment (as MOS discusses at length after), with a tight-to-the-line roving McManus to take any missed hole.  Would Brady have gotten it?  Maybe 50% chance.

But just like with MTL, we did have an isolated man coverage a bit farther down the field, about 10Y down on a crosser in the middle, and Kenny is basically wide open with soft laying-back coverage.  Zach could easily throw to him even under pressure, and Kenny has 50% chance of making 1 guy miss and the field is 100% wide open for a TD and a tied game.  (Even with Zach's injury he can make that toss.)

But we wanted the "high percentage" short curl.  Because we aren't bold.  This is Buck and MOS.  I bet Zach was told only throw to Kenny if Demski had some guy in front of him.  We had 6 on 6 with the heat coming and no one was busting through immediately, there was even maybe time for a double-move by Demski and a seam go route.

Dinwiddie and his braintrust studied our braintrust and knew that we are never bold.  We are scared and wimpy and you'll always beat us by putting your money down on the scared and wimpy play call.

I don't know what it's going to take, but we aren't winning until we decide to be bold.  Our team isn't the '21 team that can win everything on raw talent alone.  3rd and 3 to win the game and we should throw a mid pass, or bring out some play we haven't used all season.  You don't throw a 5Y curl.  In fact, it was a failed 5Y curl (probably to Demski) that lost us the '22 GC because TOR knocked it down and we couldn't kill the clock.  I said after that play I never want to see the dumb expected short curl again!

Why doesn't someone @WFC study these things and learn from our mistakes?

[TecnoGenius]

The Brissett 4Q TD where he appears to be wide open... Booth got it wrong, it's BA37's fault, not Nick Taylor.  It's also a function of Kramdi being out and strange substitutions all over the place.  Yes, also we were down 1 man, but in this case it probably didn't matter.

Like most of what TOR's O was doing, the play design and call were brilliant.  I'm not sure TOR used this all season.  Brissett didn't do much of anything all season.  He was the ace up the sleeve.

So BA37 gets in front of Brissett and thinks it's a zone sit and he's got it covered.  But Brissett, after a pause, spins off BA and continues to the zone hole.  BA figures Brissett is just a decoy, a nobody NAT who was rarely thrown to.  He doesn't take him seriously and doesn't notice Brissett sneaking deeper.

Since BA had no one else in his zone, he should have followed Brissett to the hole and then Arbuckle either throws it for a possible INT, or he has to scramble or throw the wide-out (well covered by a pinned DB).  In any event, it's probably not a TD.

That play was 100% the TOR braintrust and Brissett executing the feint, and TOR's OL providing time.  Arbuckle was just playing pitch & catch to a wide open REC; nothing special.

You could argue the zone D at that moment was a dumb move by Younger, but we had the injury substitutions causing confusion, so maybe that's the best we could do.  We couldn't get pressure with 4 as TOR had 6 blocking.

Maybe we meant to have 2 FS so Nick could cheat over to that side... who knows.  It was a shambles of a play, but it's unfair to pin it on Taylor like TSN did.

I want to contrast the creativity of genius of this play to the Demski 3rd & 3 curl.  Why did TOR have these genius plays dialed up and we had braindead 5Y curls?  Why didn't we do something like this when we had those 2 wasted redzone visits?  Nah, just corner fades and curls and plain simple page 1 book plays.  Really sad.  We used to outsmart teams... now they always outsmart us.

[TecnoGenius]

I did a scoring breakdown of every player making great or horrible plays.

By net count, the most effective players were (in no particular order):

Garbutt
Bonds
Willie
Haba
Taylor
Pokey
Brady

Guys with big net-negatives:
Nichols
Kenny
Wheatfall
Alexander

With limited play or action, guys that stood out as positives:
Hallett
Gauthier
Ayers
Holm

The OL did very well, except maybe in garbage time when focus was lost and morale was gone.  But you cannot take a IP on play #1!!

Zach had some great moments before injury, though also a couple of bad ones, so maybe a wash until it all fell apart.

Buck and MOS severely let us down.  Zero creativity.  Zero boldness.  Zero lessons learned from the last 2 GC losses.  Zero foresight.  Zero preparation throughout the year for this game.  Just "trust the process", but the process only gets you to the cup: it doesn't win it.  We aren't good enough to just walk in unprepared and win GCs anymore.

Our braintrust should start RIGHT NOW preparing to beat TOR or MTL in the '25 GC.  At worst it's wasted time, at best it wins us the next cup.  Dinwiddie studied how to beat WPG for all of '24, and he cleaned our clocks with a "journeyman" (to be generous) QB.