Stumps/Pussycats - actual offensive balance in a CFL game ???

[OV Argo]

The Stamps offence last night - in wet field conditions - featured 28 pass attempts by Glenn; and 20 runs to Cornish (who had a season break-out game after looking quite ordinary or weak so far this year) + 3 sweep type runs to receiver Bryant + 3 designed runs by back-up QB Mitchell + a run play to Larry Taylor + a run call to back-up RB Matt Walter = 28 run calls ... and a decisive win on the road ??? - WTF came over Huff and the Stamps brain-trust?

Watching that rainy Ivor Wynne game - i was reminded of a Ticats / Renegades match-up in similar or wetter conditions there back around 10 years or so ago: the Ticats decided to line-up in a double TE formation and run the ball a lot of the game (I believe it was Duane Forde as one of the TEs; maybe Darren Davis (?) at tailback, but also a Canadian back (Jarrett Smith maybe) got a lot of carriers; the Gades went mostly pass with Kerry Joseph ... and the Ticats won.

Anybody remember the Bombers / BC match-up of a few seasons back - where the Bombers loaded up with the ground game and ran wild over a weak BC run defence? (huge game by the Bombers starting tailback and their back-up RB racked up big yardage too). Way more ground game vs. passing by an offence in that game - almost never seen in the CFL.

CFL offences actually game planning a lot of run ... and it pays off with wins ??? - who knew this could possibly happen?

Standard look 75% pass game plans remain the norm with CFL offensive "thinkers" though; even with all kinds of terrible offensive displays as evidence; OTOH - meanwhile - ZERO evidence of a strong, applied run game failing in the CFL (not that i can name anyhow - somebody please provide me of one shred of such game evidence from the last decade of CFL play if i an wrong).

Argos have a big, strong back in Boyd; plus have vet Johnson who is capable of carrying the mail + Duire available for some runs + could dress Kackert ... last game what was it - 30 some pass attempts by Ray and maybe even 10 or so carries by Boyd ?

The good ole CFL.

[ArgoRavi]

It all depends on how bad the run defence is that a team is facing too. It makes zero sense to run the ball 60% of the time against a solid run defence which the Ticats don't have.

[OV Argo]

Ah - i knew i could count on you Ravi - to provide rationalization - for same old CFL standard, homogenous thinking. ;o)

[KCargosfan]

Ah - i knew i could count on you Ravi - to provide rationalization - for same old CFL standard, homogenous thinking. ;o)

That would be common sense thinking by Ravi. Hamilton's run defense sucks, therefore you run the ball against them. BC's run defense is awesome, so there's no point in trying to run the ball a lot.

[OV Argo]

That would be common sense thinking by Ravi. Hamilton's run defense sucks, therefore you run the ball against them. BC's run defense is awesome, so there's no point in trying to run the ball a lot.


Yes - of course - precisely - that's why when the Argos lost to the Ticats this year - their offensive game plan vs. a weak run D was 38 pass plays vs. 19 run calls to Boyd.

And i realize you may not have been following the CFL game that long; but - can you grasp my point maybe?: ZERO CFL game evidence of an applied ground game - balance or more run calls than pass calls - failing / poor offensive output - in a decade or more of CFL play to go by? Am i out of line trying to discuss the concept of football offensive game planning with regards to the CFL? - or are the good ole boys at HC or OC there beyond question or scrutiny?

[KCargosfan]

Yes - of course - precisely - that's why when the Argos lost to the Ticats this year - their offensive game plan vs. a weak run D was 38 pass plays vs. 19 run calls to Boyd.

Fine with me against Hamilton. But against BC when Boyd is getting hit 2 yards behind the line of scrimmage and our OL is getting blown-up every single play, you aren't going to try and establish a run game.

Also, offense wasn't the reason we lost to Hamilton. Crappy kicking and special teams play was.

[paulwoods13]

Yes - of course - precisely - that's why when the Argos lost to the Ticats this year - their offensive game plan vs. a weak run D was 38 pass plays vs. 19 run calls to Boyd.

IIRC didn't Boyd have 168 yards or thereabouts in that game? If so, it was obviously a major failure on the part of good ol' CFL brainiacs in action. He could easily have had 336 yards had the pass/run ratio been reversed as it so clearly should have been.

[OV Argo]

IIRC didn't Boyd have 168 yards or thereabouts in that game? If so, it was obviously a major failure on the part of good ol' CFL brainiacs in action. He could easily have had 336 yards had the pass/run ratio been reversed as it so clearly should have been.


The Bombers O had somewhere around 336 + rush yards when they slaughtered BC a few seasons back - in maybe the only CFL game evidence of a team loading up on way more run than pass from the past couple of decades - not good enough for you i guess - and why not accept the challenge to provide some real CFL game evidence of an applied run game failing? - let's hear/see it? - or is defending anything/everything the good ole CFL brainiacs do more to your liking?

[Wobbler]

Since we're discussing extreme hypotheticals, has anyone tried not dressing any backs at all, and going 6 pack for an entire game? A mobile QB should be able to provide enough of a run threat to keep at least one LB in the box and if you're throwing long a lot, a high completion percentage is less important.

I empathize with OV in the sense that I wish CFL organizations were more willing to experiment. If you built an offense with a killer run game, for example, you might be in an interesting and advantageous position. Everyone else would scheme against your run game, but they couldn't stack their rosters with run-stoppers because the rest of the league would be doing something different.

The problem, I guess, is that you'd need to build the entire team around an extreme strategy to make it dominant, and with the high player turnover in our league that might be hard to sustain. I still wish teams would do it, though.

[KCargosfan]

And i realize you may not have been following the CFL game that long; but - can you grasp my point maybe?: ZERO CFL game evidence of an applied ground game - balance or more run calls than pass calls - failing / poor offensive output - in a decade or more of CFL play to go by? Am i out of line trying to discuss the concept of football offensive game planning with regards to the CFL? - or are the good ole boys at HC or OC there beyond question or scrutiny?

I grasp your point, even though I may not agree with it, but I will leave it to more CFL-smart people like yourself, argolio, AngeloV, pw13, gilthethrill and others to discuss detailed offensive game-planning.

You can question the good ole boys all you want, I have no problem with that. In your original post you said: "last game what was it - 30 some pass attempts by Ray and maybe even 10 or so carries by Boyd ?" My point is that BC's DL was dominating the game, and every time we tried to run, Boyd got crushed, so making multiple attempts to establish a run game would not have been smart.

If we want to bring Jarious Jackson in and run the triple option half of the time with a FB and Boyd and Kackert vs. Hamilton, that would be interesting.

[OV Argo]

Since we're discussing extreme hypotheticals, has anyone tried not dressing any backs at all, and going 6 pack for an entire game? A mobile QB should be able to provide enough of a run threat to keep at least one LB in the box and if you're throwing long a lot, a high completion percentage is less important.

I empathize with OV in the sense that I wish CFL organizations were more willing to experiment. If you built an offense with a killer run game, for example, you might be in an interesting and advantageous position. Everyone else would scheme against your run game, but they couldn't stack their rosters with run-stoppers because the rest of the league would be doing something different.

The problem, I guess, is that you'd need to build the entire team around an extreme strategy to make it dominant, and with the high player turnover in our league that might be hard to sustain. I still wish teams would do it, though.

Yeah - and a thing with standard, same old CFL offensive thinking and lack of emphasis on a ground game - I'd be willing to bet there are some outstanding run blocking O-linemen available to the CFL - think mostly top notch NCAA import guards and centres (maybe a few great run blocking CIS linemen too) - guys who aren't suitable / are under-sized or over-looked by the NFL; yet almost all CFL teams show no inclination to bring in a few of these guys for a look to see if they could be a fit to help a CFL ground game - the standard same old thinking is to go with NIs only on the interior O-line - and guys who maybe aren't polished run blockers or are picked more on size or pass-blocking ability only. So - the Argos end up starting a former CIS slotback / TE at C; a fomer CIS D-limeman at guard ; and a former NCAA back-up OT at guard too ... ??? - and we're wondering why Boyd doesn't seem to have any room or decent holes to run thru a lot of the time?

I dunno what could happen; but i have to wonder what a CFL offence might be able to do - at least some of time - with a couple of accomplished, finesse run blocking interior O-linemen in their line-up and an applied, consistent run game with backs like Boyd, Durie, Kackert getting lost of run calls - and against a lot of lightweight tweener OLBs or smallish rush DEs; and not at all accounting for what a top fullback or TE might add to such an offence? Not expecting a number of CFL teams to think of this possibility, but the fact that NONE/ZERO do - IMO speaks volumes about the state of the CFL game/offences now. Same old / homogenity / standard thinking rules - seems to me anyhow.

[1argoholic]

Speaking of running I've been meaning to mention Joe Eppele leading Boyd down field a few games back. Holy crap can that guy haul for a big man. I'd like to see him carry the ball. haha.
I would love to see a run game like that of the Stamps last night. Filtering guys in and out and running different plays rather than straight up the guy everytime.
Plus watching all the great Canadian talent being used by Calgary and Hamilton was nice to see. Charboneau-Campeau had some nice catches.

[OV Argo]

Speaking of running I've been meaning to mention Joe Eppele leading Boyd down field a few games back. Holy crap can that guy haul for a big man. I'd like to see him carry the ball. haha.
I would love to see a run game like that of the Stamps last night. Filtering guys in and out and running different plays rather than straight up the guy everytime.
Plus watching all the great Canadian talent being used by Calgary and Hamilton was nice to see. Charboneau-Campeau had some nice catches.


Fantuz, Giguere, Stala, Charbonneau-Campeau - all with some receptions in the game for the Ticats - 4 NI receivers with playing time? - go figure.

Argos could have drafted Charbonneau-Campeau; hopefully Laing shows up next year and actually gets earns playing time for the Argos.

Eric Fraser looked excellent at safety for the Stamps IMO; Argos might have drafted him, but dealt away a first round pick they had in that 09 draft.

[Wobbler]

Argos could have drafted Charbonneau-Campeau; hopefully Laing shows up next year and actually gets earns playing time for the Argos.
Herve Tonye-Tonye is the guy we chose in the fourth round despite SCC's availability. Didn't you watch the draft?

[Gill The Thrill]

I understand what OV's saying and I do agree. The defences have caught up to the offenses big time in the last few years and it's because of the same old play calling. Why can't teams go with 2 import backs, in particular Toronto with Kackert and Boyd, and why can't you line them up in the same play. Jason Barnes has done squat, so it would not hurt to sit him down and put Kackert in the lineup. He tore apart the Eskimos last year at Commonwealth when Boyd was injured, and the Esks have a lot of the same personel on defence and are strong defensively.

To prove OV's point even more, the late Greg Mohns coached his way to a Grey Cup in 2000 on the strength of a 2 back attack when he was stuffing the run game down teams throats with Robert Drummond and Sean Millington late in the season. A solid run game is so valuable especially when the weather gets unpredictable in the fall.

[ArgoRavi]

To prove OV's point even more, the late Greg Mohns coached his way to a Grey Cup in 2000 on the strength of a 2 back attack when he was stuffing the run game down teams throats with Robert Drummond and Sean Millington late in the season. A solid run game is so valuable especially when the weather gets unpredictable in the fall.

Steve Burratto was the head coach of the Lions at that point. Earlier in the 2000 season, the Argos used twin tight ends and did not go with the "same ole same ole" and they went a very ugly 1-6-1 under John Huard. Even the next year, Gary Etcheverry ran the ball a lot in a conservative offence and the Argos went 4-8 prior to him being fired. If we go back to 1997, Don Sutherin went with twin tight ends in Hamilton and they won very few games before he was axed as head coach.

I do understand what OV is saying and don't totally disagree with him but people have to remember that opposition defences dictate to some degree what the offences are doing as well. If a defence puts eight guys in the box as many defences did against the Argos last season, then it becomes much more difficult to run the football.

[paulwoods13]

The Bombers O had somewhere around 336 + rush yards when they slaughtered BC a few seasons back - in maybe the only CFL game evidence of a team loading up on way more run than pass from the past couple of decades - not good enough for you i guess - and why not accept the challenge to provide some real CFL game evidence of an applied run game failing? - let's hear/see it? - or is defending anything/everything the good ole CFL brainiacs do more to your liking?

So one game in the last decade constitutes proof that an "applied run game" always works? Or is that question just more evidence that I love to defend the good ole CFL brainiacs? OV, you slay me sometimes.


Fantuz, Giguere, Stala, Charbonneau-Campeau - all with some receptions in the game for the Ticats - 4 NI receivers with playing time? - go figure.

You mean good ole Obie and good ole Cortez are actually using Canadians? Shurely there must be a mistake!

[OV Argo]

You mean good ole Obie and good ole Cortez are actually using Canadians? Shurely there must be a mistake!

Yeah - what came over them; Charbonneau-Campeau got in when Fantuz got hurt; and 2 time 1000 yd. vet receiver Stala was benched early in the year for a raw rookie import receiver; Obie and Cortez types are forced to use some NIs by that damn nuisance ratio thingy.


So one game in the last decade constitutes proof that an "applied run game" always works? Or is that question just more evidence that I love to defend the good ole CFL brainiacs? OV, you slay me sometimes.

Who said it "always works" ??? - the point more is - it is almost never tried, inspite of zero evidence that it can fail. And if you can't grasp that says something about CFL "brainiacs" (your term) - then so be it.

[Gill The Thrill]

Steve Burratto was the head coach of the Lions at that point. Earlier in the 2000 season, the Argos used twin tight ends and did not go with the "same ole same ole" and they went a very ugly 1-6-1 under John Huard. Even the next year, Gary Etcheverry ran the ball a lot in a conservative offence and the Argos went 4-8 prior to him being fired. If we go back to 1997, Don Sutherin went with twin tight ends in Hamilton and they won very few games before he was axed as head coach.

I do understand what OV is saying and don't totally disagree with him but people have to remember that opposition defences dictate to some degree what the offences are doing as well. If a defence puts eight guys in the box as many defences did against the Argos last season, then it becomes much more difficult to run the football.

I never mentioned 2 Tight Ends, I said 2 backs that could run. Another example when the Argos got demolished by a running game was the 2005 Final when they were defending their Grey Cup from 2004. I believe the Als had Robert Edwards, but especially destroyed the Argos with Eric Lapointe having a carear game. Jesse Lumsden and Troy Davis also ran all over a good Argo defence in '06 or '07.

I'd much rather go with a twin back set, rather than a 6 pack of receivers because only one of the receivers can get the ball anyway and it does not keep the defence from preparing to shutdown a more balanced attack that a twin back set can offer. Teams did not respect the Argo passing game last year because they did not respect the accuracy of the QB that we had last year, so that meant they were more than secure in loading up the box with 8 defenders and blitzing all game. They did not fear the big play via the long bomb. Remember there is also no law that states that a back can't catch a pass while lining up in twin back formation. Pinball and Drummond used to do it all the time in 1996 and 97, you didn't see Matthews sit one of them out because they were both imports...yes he would relieve one of them at times and put in Duane Dmytryshn, an N/I at times, but he always dressed both imports, just as I think the Argos should do presently with both Boyd and Kackert.

Those teams that you mentioned Ravi, the Etcheverry Argos and the Sutherin coached Ticats were also bad because of the other facets of the game...Their defenses were horrible also. That Etcheverry Defence in '02 gave up run yardage like it was going out of style. I remember John Avery with Edmonton running at will and getting 9 to 15 yds a carry in that Tony Hawk game. That was a Swiss cheese defence the Argos played that year. In between Avery run of 8-15 yds, saw a young Ricky Ray getting enough time to shred the defence because the Argo run defense was so weak and needed extra attention...so in essence, the run game set up the pass game as much as the other way around. John Huard in 2000 changed a defensive scheme that was very decent under Jim Barker, sure the offense did stall after some games, but I believe that was more a case of some players, especially guys who thought they should run the dressing room like Mookie Mitchell deciding that they were never going to play for Huard...The Argos also did not have a QB in those years as I think Kerwin Bell, the only QB who put up big numbers after Flutie was already gone. Coincidentally he'd be picked up again by the Argos to give them some stability at the position after Huard was fired.

[paulwoods13]

Who said it "always works" ??? - the point more is - it is almost never tried, inspite of zero evidence that it can fail. And if you can't grasp that says something about CFL "brainiacs" (your term) - then so be it.

Seriously, "my term"? OV, do you even read your own posts?


Pinball and Drummond used to do it all the time in 1996 and 97, you didn't see Matthews sit one of them out because they were both imports...yes he would relieve one of them at times and put in Duane Dmytryshn, an N/I at times, but he always dressed both imports, just as I think the Argos should do presently with both Boyd and Kackert.

Your recollection is different than mine. Mine is that Pinball lined up almost exclusively as a slotback in both of those seasons. He averaged only three carries per game in 96-97, while averaging almost seven receptions per game. Pinball and Matthews have both spoken many times about how he converted to slotback in that offence. Dmytryshn was actually a starter for much of that period as well, one of three slotbacks (with Pinball and Mitchell) in the five-receiver set they used the vast majority of the time. If the Argos were to dress Kackert and actually line him up in a two-TB formation (which I don't see happening), I believe that would be something we haven't really seen since Metcalf and Mike McArthur in 1978 or '79.

Further to this, here are a couple of extensive game highlights packages from 1997. They obviously don't show every play but in the ones they do show, Pinball does not appear to line up in anything resembling a tailback position from what I could see on quick review. At one point in the Edmonton game, Leif says Pinball is unlikely to make the all-star team despite catching 100-plus passes because he is officially a running back (and the East also had Drummond and Pringle) but the strong inference is that he is an RB in name only, and actually a slotback. Note also that Dmytryshyn scores a TD against Edm and they discuss how he is starting at slotback.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL471E334BD49AD741&feature=plcp

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE945EDE243BB25B3&feature=plcp

[ArgoRavi]

You are right, Paul. Pinball was a slotback back in '96 and '97.

[Fungi]

THE PINBALL is godlike and shoots footballs out his arse.
Lets just have some fun this year.
Go Argooooos

[AngeloV]

OV, as soimeone that was at the game, it was not raining during the game. The new artificial surfaces around the league also make it less of an issue if the field is wet. Now, I think you've made a big mistake in looking at the final stats to support your argument. Calgary must have run the ball on their final 10 plays or so from scrimmage. The offesive attack was not balanced throuout the game. The fact that Kevin Glenn really sucked in the game, and Hamilton just couldn't stop Cornish was more of a factor than actual game plan into deciding the pass run ratio IMO.

[OV Argo]

OV, as soimeone that was at the game, it was not raining during the game. The new artificial surfaces around the league also make it less of an issue if the field is wet. Now, I think you've made a big mistake in looking at the final stats to support your argument. Calgary must have run the ball on their final 10 plays or so from scrimmage. The offesive attack was not balanced throuout the game. The fact that Kevin Glenn really sucked in the game, and Hamilton just couldn't stop Cornish was more of a factor than actual game plan into deciding the pass run ratio IMO.


AV - i wasn't trying to claim that it was a big Stamps offensive game-plan to run as much as throw; I was however pointing out what a balanced attack - and whatever the reason for having close to balance or, gawd/good ole boys forbid, more ground game than pass - can often result in, in CFL games - decent to very good offensive production, and a WIN!

There are at least a few very prominent examples of this happening in the CFL - in a couple of decades ! ??? - and yet the cliquish CFL "thinkers" all continue to run the same basic look, pass prominent offence. If you want to believe that's just the way it has to be in the CFL, then that's fine - the game of football has certainly evolved to way more passing, and their are some great passing games in the CFL, NFL and lower levels of football too. I however, happen to prefer lots of variety in football, I like a strong ground game, and also smart use of all aspects / positions on offence (like a fullback or tight end); and i find it interesting, maddening / frustrating or questionable or lauughable that ALL CFL teams pretty well think the same way for the most part and even with some good evidence of it working well (the 2000 BC Lions GC offence was mentioned in this thread - Drummond & Millington; 94 BC Champs with Millington / Philpott too and others noted - including that glaring Bomber slaughter of BC a few years back where 2 RBs ran wild - more ground game than pass ), AND, ZERO evidence of a balanced or run heavy attack failing ... we get basically same old offensive look, pretty well all the time.

I guess because it's a small 8 team league; and very cliquish, copy-cat ... and you're only going to get hired as a HC or OC if you subscribe to standard party line thinking; no balance on offence please, and do NOT try running the ball lots or more than you throw = it just can't work. ;o)

[Argocister]

OV, as soimeone that was at the game, it was not raining during the game............ The offesive attack was not balanced throuout the game. The fact that Kevin Glenn really sucked in the game, and Hamilton just couldn't stop Cornish was more of a factor than actual game plan into deciding the pass run ratio IMO.
I agree with you on this one .(was at the game as well) Glenn did not play well..... or should I say he played like Glenn. My husband was constantly saying all game.... yeah I remember those plays last year..... glad its on the other team this year
As for the rushing game in the 4th, Thomas was hurt and he was replacing Knowlton, so according to Cortez, they are the key to the run defense for the Ticats. That could be the reason for the "planned" balanced offense on the Stamps part.
http://scratchingpost.thespec.com/2012/08/key-injury-had-big-impact-on-ticats-fourth-quarter-run-defence.html