Here we go again: CFL offensive "thinking"

[OV Argo]

Game 1:

Argos offence = 39 pass attempts by the QBs; and 7 run calls to the RBs (not counting QB runs or scrambles for either team)

Bummers offence = 28 pass attempts; and 24 ground game attempts for the RBs.


But let me guess - this was all determined by the Bombers getting an early lead, and the Argos' O had no choice but to go all-pass to catch up; and conversely, the Bombers were just content or able to go to more run game to protect the lead ??? - does that sound about right, all you defenders of the good ole boy faith ? ;o)

I thought/said here, pre-game, that it would be interesting to see the Argos run game with the new RBs; and that, no matter, Ricky Ray would be able to light it up with a mostly pass offence with his great passing ability and a very good receiving corps = wrong-O.


Going to keep tracking these CFL offensive "trends" as the season wears on.

[Argocister]

Game 1:

.......

But let me guess - this was all determined by the Bombers getting an early lead, and the Argos' O had no choice but to go all-pass to catch up; and conversely, the Bombers were just content or able to go to more run game to protect the lead ??? - does that sound about right, all you defenders of the good ole boy faith ? ;o)

...........

Going to keep tracking these CFL offensive "trends" as the season wears on.

Okay, ..... Not having actually played the game, and just learning about the strategy ..... What I have learned is that if you are ahead in the game, the number of running plays increases as you want to move the ball slowly and waste time...
Also, if you have a limited amount of time you need the pass.
There was no offense in the first quarter for the Argos , so passing and running was not an option.
What would be your strategy starting the second quarter ..... Knowing that you are still trying out the RBs ( that's funny, the spell check kept wanting Arabs in there)
I'm not arguing one way or the other .... I want to know an alternative to the standard dogma.

[ArgoGabe22]

Grigsby had more carries than Steele at the start, early in the game if I recall.

Usually when the Argos run game struggles, they lose. Even in the Boyd era, if he didn't get 100 yards in the game then it as most likely a loss. But that stat is useless as it's almost a no brainer for the winning team to run the ball.

[paulwoods13]

The Bombers ran the all effectively so it's not surprising they went with a lot of runs. The Argos didn't run it all that effectively, which might be due (at least in part) to not trying to run much. But they were 17 points behind early so I can't criticize them too much for relying on the best passer in the league rather than two unproven RBs.

[OV Argo]

Okay, ..... Not having actually played the game, and just learning about the strategy ..... What I have learned is that if you are ahead in the game, the number of running plays increases as you want to move the ball slowly and waste time...
Also, if you have a limited amount of time you need the pass.
There was no offense in the first quarter for the Argos , so passing and running was not an option.
What would be your strategy starting the second quarter ..... Knowing that you are still trying out the RBs ( that's funny, the spell check kept wanting Arabs in there)
I'm not arguing one way or the other .... I want to know an alternative to the standard dogma.

Good RBs - if they are used often/consistently - can often break big gainiers - 30, 40, 50 yard plus gains; of course, if you have little faith in the ground game as a potential good offensive weapon; control the ball, make first downs and sometimes get big chunks of yards, then, by all means, defer to a mostly pass offence; and some passing games net big yardage with well down the field throws.

[Rich]

The Argo offense looked badly unprepared for this game. Way too much confusion on the audibles. Guys didn't know where to line up. And how many times did Ricky have to stop the snap count to keep guys from going offside?

The confusion on defence is understandable. But I would have expected a little more cohesion from a largely veteran offensive unit. Lets hope they're not overthinking things with those sideline pictogram signals.

[paulwoods13]

The Argo offense looked badly unprepared for this game. Way too much confusion on the audibles. Guys didn't know where to line up. And how many times did Ricky have to stop the snap count to keep guys from going offside?

The confusion on defence is understandable. But I would have expected a little more cohesion from a largely veteran offensive unit. Lets hope they're not overthinking things with those sideline pictogram signals.

I agree there was a lot of confusion, and some of it might have been related to the crazy sideline cards they were using to send in plays. However, stopping the count to prevent offsides is often a deliberate tactic to flush out what the defence is doing: have the waggle begin to see if defenders are in man-to-man or zone, then stop it and adjust the call based on what you see.

[AngeloV]

B.C: 16 carries by non QB's and 28 pass attempts.
Edm: 11 carries by non QB's and 35 pass attempts.

Seems like the less balanced team won this game.

Calgary ran 23 times by non RB's and threw 25 passes. More balanced yes, but looking at the play by plat game log, 11 of their 23 runs came in the 4th quarter, while protecting a big lead. That's about half their runs. Only 2 passes thrown in the 4th by Mitchell. So in order to establish their big lead it was a 23 to 12 ratio. I wouldn't call that overly balanced.

For the record, I have no problem with a balanced offence. But I do believe that when the winning team's stats are more balanced in a blow out victory, it is often because leading teams are trying to run the clock late in games. Personally, I'm more interested in seeing what the ratio was when the big lead was established. Teams playing from behind are obviously going to have more pass heavy stats.

How does this relate to the Argos? Not much at all. They did win a Grey Cup very recently relying mostly on the passing game.

[OV Argo]

B.C: 16 carries by non QB's and 28 pass attempts.
Edm: 11 carries by non QB's and 35 pass attempts.

Seems like the less balanced team won this game.

Calgary ran 23 times by non RB's and threw 25 passes. More balanced yes, but looking at the play by plat game log, 11 of their 23 runs came in the 4th quarter, while protecting a big lead. That's about half their runs. Only 2 passes thrown in the 4th by Mitchell. So in order to establish their big lead it was a 23 to 12 ratio. I wouldn't call that overly balanced.

For the record, I have no problem with a balanced offence. But I do believe that when the winning team's stats are more balanced in a blow out victory, it is often because leading teams are trying to run the clock late in games. Personally, I'm more interested in seeing what the ratio was when the big lead was established. Teams playing from behind are obviously going to have more pass heavy stats.

How does this relate to the Argos? Not much at all. They did win a Grey Cup very recently relying mostly on the passing game.

Argos offence in the 2012 GC WIN: 30 pass attempts by Ray that gained 231 yards; + run game - Kackert with 20 carries for 133 yards.

Argos play-off LOSS last season: Ray with 32 pass attempts that netted 329 yards; ground game of 2 carries for 4 yards by Norwood.

[Wobbler]

Isn't this thread about 'CFL offensive "trends" as the season wears on'? I think it would be more useful to see what is working in 2014 rather than cherry pick examples from the past.

[ArgoRavi]

I really don't think that anyone goes into a game anymore thinking that they have to run the ball a certain amount of times. I seriously doubt that Milanovich going into the 2012 Grey Cup thought, "Hey, let's give Kackert 20 carries in this game." That is just the way things evolved in that game and that is what happens in any game. Part of the evolution of any game is the score at the time and what the opposition defence is and is not doing and what is working and not working.

[Ron]

One game? You're recycling rants after just one game?

[AngeloV]

Argos offence in the 2012 GC WIN: 30 pass attempts by Ray that gained 231 yards; + run game - Kackert with 20 carries for 133 yards.

Argos play-off LOSS last season: Ray with 32 pass attempts that netted 329 yards; ground game of 2 carries for 4 yards by Norwood.

Argos also had a big lead early in that game. It's very easy to look at final stats. As I mentioned earlier, final stats don't necessarily reflect how a team got their lead.

[OV Argo]

I really don't think that anyone goes into a game anymore thinking that they have to run the ball a certain amount of times. I seriously doubt that Milanovich going into the 2012 Grey Cup thought, "Hey, let's give Kackert 20 carries in this game." That is just the way things evolved in that game and that is what happens in any game. Part of the evolution of any game is the score at the time and what the opposition defence is and is not doing and what is working and not working.

Agreed Ravi; one thing you will see fairly often in the CFL nowdays, is a team try the run game some early, and if it works well early, they will stick with it some to produce a sort of balanced offence; OTOH - if a run game fails early, a lot of CFL offences will abandon it like a rat off a sinking ship, and the end result is wayyyy more pass than run plays. We shall see how this goes or evolves this season. And i'll point out again, there are ZERO (zip, nadda, none) CFL offences that will try more run game than pass plays (has happened only 2 or 3 times in the past number of seasons (decades or more ?) - and that was in single, particular game, not on the season / on average - AND - the teams that went run heavy won in all particular cases) = is what it is, and that's just the only way offences work now ? - but surely the game or season offensive thinking can evolve in any or many ways, right Ravi ? ;o)

If some don't like analysis of CFL thinking or trends, well excuuuuuuuse me. Maybe there should be a seperate forum here for those who just like to cheer-lead or who accept anything and everything that happens in the CFL as that just the way she goes.

[ArgoZ]

Agreed Ravi; one thing you will see fairly often in the CFL nowdays, is a team try the run game some early, and if it works well early, they will stick with it some to produce a sort of balanced offence; OTOH - if a run game fails early, a lot of CFL offences will abandon it like a rat off a sinking ship, and the end result is wayyyy more pass than run plays. We shall see how this goes or evolves this season. And i'll point out again, there are ZERO (zip, nadda, none) CFL offences that will try more run game than pass plays (has happened only 2 or 3 times in the past number of seasons (decades or more ?) - and that was in single, particular game, not on the season / on average - AND - the teams that went run heavy won in all particular cases) = is what it is, and that's just the only way offences work now ? - but surely the game or season offensive thinking can evolve in any or many ways, right Ravi ? ;o)

If some don't like analysis of CFL thinking or trends, well excuuuuuuuse me. Maybe there should be a seperate forum here for those who just like to cheer-lead or who accept anything and everything that happens in the CFL as that just the way she goes.

This is getting silly. The CFL has always been a pass heavy league with it's rules. It is the reason so many of us are fans because of the wide open play and entertainment. The NFL is becoming more of a pass than run league, should we question all those coaches too? To sit here and look at stats and say coulda, shoulda, woulda, is far too easy and it does become tiresome listening to someone act like they are an expert of the game, when in reality they are just an armchair QB.

[paulwoods13]

The CFL has always been a pass heavy league with it's rules. It is the reason so many of us are fans because of the wide open play and entertainment.

Actually, the CFL was run-oriented in the 1960s and most of the 1970s. It was only around 1978, when the Eskimos got rid of tight ends and adopted the twin-slotback look, that the league started to become dominated by passing attacks. IMO it also became much more entertaining at that time (altho I like offences to include a healthy mix of running plays).

[Ron]

If some don't like analysis of CFL thinking or trends, well excuuuuuuuse me. Maybe there should be a seperate forum here for those who just like to cheer-lead or who accept anything and everything that happens in the CFL as that just the way she goes.

Some may call it "analysis of CFL thinking or trends" ... while others see it as just the same OLD rant you've recycled annually for well over a decade. Pure stagnation of thought with each new season getting a new coat of lipstick on the pig. Enjoy!

[OV Argo]

Sorry Ron, don't have any conspiracy theory topics for you to chime in on. ;o)

Back to the topic - game 4 - Riders vs. Ticats - game played in heavy rain, wet field conditions = you't think that might dictate some 'thinking' towards more run game ... well, the Riders thought so; but not Kent. And BTW - Collaros looked horrible IMO - maybe partly due to the rain and wind/field condition , and also with a porous O-Line (set-up to be exposed with no run game threat) and a tough, relentless Riders D; but still - Collaros looked lost, indecisive, inaccurate arm, floated some very bad gift picks, couldn't run/scramble - could be a long season for Kent-boy and Hammer fans - still only game one though ;o)

[Argocister]

........... - could be a long season for Kent-boy and Hammer fans - still only game one though ;o)

I agree, Zach was comfortable in the Argos system. So is Austin trying to mold Collaros into his design? Or is it just the Oline and Zach aren't in sync ..... Yet
You would have thought with Gable the run game would take off.

[ArgoRavi]

Game 1:

Argos offence = 39 pass attempts by the QBs; and 7 run calls to the RBs (not counting QB runs or scrambles for either team)

Bummers offence = 28 pass attempts; and 24 ground game attempts for the RBs.


But let me guess - this was all determined by the Bombers getting an early lead, and the Argos' O had no choice but to go all-pass to catch up; and conversely, the Bombers were just content or able to go to more run game to protect the lead ??? - does that sound about right, all you defenders of the good ole boy faith ? ;o)

I thought/said here, pre-game, that it would be interesting to see the Argos run game with the new RBs; and that, no matter, Ricky Ray would be able to light it up with a mostly pass offence with his great passing ability and a very good receiving corps = wrong-O.


Going to keep tracking these CFL offensive "trends" as the season wears on.

We saw an example today of a team who ran the ball far more than they threw it and ended up losing 40-9.