Grey Cup Game

[TheHammer]

Sorry, I'm a pan-CFL fan; and always love to see a good GC game - may the best team win. I would have been happy with a Ticats win, IF they deserved it, but their coaches cost them the game with stupidity, so LOL instead.

Pussycats may be the long-time Argo arch-rival, but I don't hate them or their fans (though the mouthy punks who won't tolerate other team fans or start fights, need their heads kicked-in IMO).

Sorry again, just don't get the hate I see on some of these fan forums for other teams and their fans. Blind homers make me want to ...

I feel the same way. I don't understand the absolute hate from both sides. Rivals? Sure. But the level of hate is ridiculous. I was actually cheering for the Argos in the '17 Grey Cup. It was more of a 'I'm mad at the Ticats, so I'm cheering for the Argos to win this game just out of spite, hoping it will inspire them to make changes' (plus I hate Calgary) but I cheered for them nonetheless. I've (usually) enjoyed interactions with Argo fans, and admire their dedication to the CFL in a city that otherwise doesn't care.

[RB957]

Is there any better feeling that watching the stunned fans at Tim Hortons Field in absolute shock. Amazing.

Karma is a ....losing the biggest game at home after holding a 12 point lead in the fourth quarter and then dropping it in OT.

John Murphy (without any slurs) about to party like it's 1999....the drought continues...

I was at the game, and the absolute and complete silence after Masoli's interception was something else. Like 26,000 people breathing in and then exhaling "oh s*&t" all at the same time. As loud and deafening as the CF-18's were at kickoff, this silence was the exact opposite. Never have experienced that before.

[TheHammer]

I was at the game, and the absolute and complete silence after Masoli's interception was something else. Like 26,000 people breathing in and then exhaling "oh s*&t" all at the same time. As loud and deafening as the CF-18's were at kickoff, this silence was the exact opposite. Never have experienced that before.

I was at the game. He's not wrong.

[OV Argo]

And after the Ticats conceded the single on that kick-off, to make it a 3 point deficit (instead of 2 where a FG could win it) - the TV camera panned thru the crowd, and the look of disbelief on some fans faces was noticeable and telling.

Talked today to my daughter's boy-friend (from the Hammer area and went with his Dad to the game) and he said the same thing basically - a collective WTF? was growing thru the crowd. One of the dumbest coaching decisions in GC history, IMO.

[ArgoRavi]

Giving up the rouge didn't cost the Ticats the game. Not being able to score TDs when they got inside the Winnipeg 10 yard line three times, including in the final 20 seconds is what cost them the game. Similar to what happened to the Argos last week.

[OV Argo]

Giving up the rouge didn't cost the Ticats the game. Not being able to score TDs when they got inside the Winnipeg 10 yard line three times, including in the final 20 seconds is what cost them the game. Similar to what happened to the Argos last week.

Wrong - they got down to easily make-able FG range, and then it was game over if they were down just 2 points instead of 3; could have left basically zero time on the clock left for the Bombers. Sorry if you can't see that Ravi. I guess a chip shot FG could have been blocked or missed though.

[paulwoods13]

Giving up the rouge didn't cost the Ticats the game. Not being able to score TDs when they got inside the Winnipeg 10 yard line three times, including in the final 20 seconds is what cost them the game. Similar to what happened to the Argos last week.

Very true, but conceding the rouge showed they were at least as interested in playing for a tie/OT as for a win, IMO. It is indeed both ironic and telling that two weeks in a row, a team's inability to push the ball five yards, with three cracks at it, cost them points. The CFL has got to find ways to discourage the kind of coaching that finds it acceptable to take the safe three points when you are so close to the end zone. Someone suggested making field goals two points inside xx-yard line (maybe the 25 to make them consistent with extra points?). I'd be down with that for sure. Alternatively, how about increasing points scored for TDs scored on third down, to seven or eight? The problem with this is it would penalize efficient offences that score on first or second down, but if it encouraged teams to gamble more frequently, that would be a good thing from an entertainment standpoint. This is all just blue-sky thinking, but I hope the powers that be engage in such an exercise.

[AngeloV]

Very true, but conceding the rouge showed they were at least as interested in playing for a tie/OT as for a win, IMO. It is indeed both ironic and telling that two weeks in a row, a team's inability to push the ball five yards, with three cracks at it, cost them points. The CFL has got to find ways to discourage the kind of coaching that finds it acceptable to take the safe three points when you are so close to the end zone. Someone suggested making field goals two points inside xx-yard line (maybe the 25 to make them consistent with extra points?). I'd be down with that for sure. Alternatively, how about increasing points scored for TDs scored on third down, to seven or eight? The problem with this is it would penalize efficient offences that score on first or second down, but if it encouraged teams to gamble more frequently, that would be a good thing from an entertainment standpoint. This is all just blue-sky thinking, but I hope the powers that be engage in such an exercise.

We really don't know what would have happened if he had run the ball out. If say he only reached the 20 yard line, would play calls on O and D have been different? A lot of calls made by both coaches that were curious, but I'm sure they calculated risk vs reward on all their calls. These 2 coaches are very smart and understand the league very well. I don't think Winnipeg should have given up the safety when punting out of their end zone either. There was only time for 2 more plays for the Cats with the wind in the 3rd quarter any way, so not you you are giving them a sure score when they change ends. I would have punted myself, but that's me.

[OV Argo]

Yeah - we don't know what would have happened if White had returned that kick-off: maybe he fumbles the ball away and game over/ or maybe he returns it for a TD. But what's the worst he could have done for field position - maybe the 20 yard line?; more like at least the 25 or 30 with a decent return; SO - with 1:50 still left on the clock, Sterinauer & his brain trust want to MAYBE gain 10 or so yards of field position and give up the chance to win the game with a FG ???; and guess what, they did drive into easy FG range (and sure they coulda/shoulda scored a TD from the 5 or so), and they DID kick a FG, that SHOULD HAVE won the game; but instead they only manage the tie. Brain-dead / myopic coaching IMO; and I said it immediately after the single was conceded.

[AngeloV]

Yeah - we don't know what would have happened if White had returned that kick-off: maybe he fumbles the ball away and game over/ or maybe he returns it for a TD. But what's the worst he could have done for field position - maybe the 20 yard line?; more like at least the 25 or 30 with a decent return; SO - with 1:50 still left on the clock, Sterinauer & his brain trust want to MAYBE gain 10 or so yards of field position and give up the chance to win the game with a FG ???; and guess what, they did drive into easy FG range (and sure they coulda/shoulda scored a TD from the 5 or so), and they DID kick a FG, that SHOULD HAVE won the game; but instead they only manage the tie. Brain-dead / myopic coaching IMO; and I said it immediately after the single was conceded.

You also have to take into consideration what they felt the range of the kicker was going into the wind. Maybe he thought that 10 or 15 yards were critical as far as having a chance to even make a FG. Hindsight being what it is, I don't think he expected to move the ball as well as they did on that last drive. Neither side moved the ball into the wind all game. I'm sure he felt they need to get inside the Bombers 30 yard line, and felt more comfortable starting from the 35 to accomplish this.

[paulwoods13]

You also have to take into consideration what they felt the range of the kicker was going into the wind. Maybe he thought that 10 or 15 yards were critical as far as having a chance to even make a FG. Hindsight being what it is, I don't think he expected to move the ball as well as they did on that last drive. Neither side moved the ball into the wind all game. I'm sure he felt they need to get inside the Bombers 30 yard line, and felt more comfortable starting from the 35 to accomplish this.

All true, but nonetheless it means they were essentially playing to tie rather than to win. Sure, the odds of a FG were much better from starting at the 35 than much farther back, as was likely, but why make it almost impossible to win?

That said, I saw something indicating Steinauer and Reinebold have the returner the option of deciding whether or not to bring it out. That seems rather far fetched since he dropped to a knee almost instantly. But if it's true, why would you let the player make such an important decision?

[argotom]

Yeah - we don't know what would have happened if White had returned that kick-off: maybe he fumbles the ball away and game over/ or maybe he returns it for a TD. But what's the worst he could have done for field position - maybe the 20 yard line?; more like at least the 25 or 30 with a decent return; SO - with 1:50 still left on the clock, Sterinauer & his brain trust want to MAYBE gain 10 or so yards of field position and give up the chance to win the game with a FG ???; and guess what, they did drive into easy FG range (and sure they coulda/shoulda scored a TD from the 5 or so), and they DID kick a FG, that SHOULD HAVE won the game; but instead they only manage the tie. Brain-dead / myopic coaching IMO; and I said it immediately after the single was conceded.

A bad call for sure.
In looking at the returner's mannerisms, for me anyway it appears how he was playing the American game with no repercussions in giving the knee.
After the fact, the HC and ST are merely covering for his mistake.

[RB957]

In looking at the returner's mannerisms, for me anyway it appears how he was playing the American game with no repercussions in giving the knee.
After the fact, the HC and ST are merely covering for his mistake.

It's funny... I was at the game at that end of the stadium and I had the exact same reaction and thought when it happened. I happened so quickly. If you and I are right, then it is on the coaches for not ensuring that the player knows the rules and what is expected of him. If we are wrong, and this was a deliberate decision, then the debate can rage on. And just to add my two cents worth... both kickers came out early before the second half to practice kicking into the wind. It looked to me like anything outside of 30 yards was a complete coin toss. One practice kick in particular reminded me of my golf drive sometimes.... like a snap hook. Wind was a huge issue, and it got worse as the game went on, so maybe that played into the decision, if it was a coaching decision.

[primetime31]

Very true, but conceding the rouge showed they were at least as interested in playing for a tie/OT as for a win, IMO. It is indeed both ironic and telling that two weeks in a row, a team's inability to push the ball five yards, with three cracks at it, cost them points. The CFL has got to find ways to discourage the kind of coaching that finds it acceptable to take the safe three points when you are so close to the end zone. Someone suggested making field goals two points inside xx-yard line (maybe the 25 to make them consistent with extra points?). I'd be down with that for sure. Alternatively, how about increasing points scored for TDs scored on third down, to seven or eight? The problem with this is it would penalize efficient offences that score on first or second down, but if it encouraged teams to gamble more frequently, that would be a good thing from an entertainment standpoint. This is all just blue-sky thinking, but I hope the powers that be engage in such an exercise.

How about teams just being more inventive instead of changing the rules to influence decision making? I think that we have all seen that teams are being penalized for going for field goals instead of TD's, especially at the highest levels of play. Hopefully teams will realize this and put more effort into devising plays that will score TD's. The successful ones will be the winners.

That being said, how about changing the clock rules for starters? That would be a start.

[jerrym]

TV ratings for the Grey Cup were down 22% but streaming numbers were up. Another sign of how costly the lost season was for the CFL.

The 108th Grey Cup between the Winnipeg Blue Bombers and Hamilton Tiger-Cats drew an average English language television rating of 2,873,000 on Sunday, which is down 22 percent from 2019.
The game drew an average audience of 821,000 in the key 25-54 age demographic, while an average of 1,502,000 watched in the 55-plus age demographic.
On Tuesday, TSN revealed on Twitter that streaming numbers for the game had increased by 75 percent since 2019. ...


Grey Cup Sunday TV ratings 2021:
Winnipeg vs. Hamilton — 2,873,000
2019 Grey Cup Hamilton vs. Winnipeg — 3,682,600
2018 Grey Cup Ottawa vs. Calgary — 3,132,000 (Lowest-rated game since 2001 and smallest average audience — 2,700,000 — for TSN since taking over the broadcast rights prior to the 2009 season.)
2017 Grey Cup Calgary vs. Toronto — 4,100,000

2016 Grey Cup Calgary vs. Ottawa — 3,600,000
2015 Grey Cup Ottawa vs. Edmonton — 4,100,000
2014 Grey Cup Hamilton vs. Calgary — 4,100,000

2013 Grey Cup Hamilton vs. Saskatchewan — 4,500,000
2012 Grey Cup Calgary vs. Toronto — 5,500,000
2011 Grey Cup Winnipeg vs. B.C. — 4,600,000
2010 Grey Cup Saskatchewan vs. Montreal — 6,040,000
2009 Grey Cup Saskatchewan vs. Montreal — 6,100,000

https://3downnation.com/2021/12/13/t...ent-from-2019/

[AngeloV]

That being said, how about changing the clock rules for starters? That would be a start.

You are preaching to the choir here.

[TheHammer]

TV ratings for the Grey Cup were down 22% but streaming numbers were up. Another sign of how costly the lost season was for the CFL.

https://3downnation.com/2021/12/13/t...ent-from-2019/

I find it interesting that there is supposedly so much lack of interest in Toronto, but when they play in the Grey Cup, they always draw some of the best Grey Cup ratings. Ottawa seems to draw poor TV ratings for some reason, despite having a decent fanbase. No surprise there with Saskatchewan, obviously.

[AngeloV]

I find it interesting that there is supposedly so much lack of interest in Toronto, but when they play in the Grey Cup, they always draw some of the best Grey Cup ratings. Ottawa seems to draw poor TV ratings for some reason, despite having a decent fanbase. No surprise there with Saskatchewan, obviously.

The late great Jim Hunt compared the CFL in Toronto to porn. Everybody watches, but nobody admits to it. I miss Shaky.

[TheHammer]

The late great Jim Hunt compared the CFL in Toronto to porn. Everybody watches, but nobody admits to it. I miss Shaky.

I've heard that one, too. Good stuff, Shaky👍

[Argo57]

The late great Jim Hunt compared the CFL in Toronto to porn. Everybody watches, but nobody admits to it. I miss Shaky.

I thoroughly enjoyed listening to Jim Hunt on the fan, he was a lot of fun and didn’t take himself too seriously.