Game #5 - EE vs The Lions

[Looner]

Fair points, the defense hasn't been good at all which I wasn't expecting it to struggle this badly but even if the defense was better and say tied with the Argos for points per game allowed, the Elks through 5 games are averaging 23.6 that's with the 39 they put up against Ottawa that inflates their number. So they'd still be losing because they don't score enough. That games would be just closer.

The defense can't really stop anyone which is limiting the opportunities for the offense so that puts pressure on the offense and Ford but the offense when it does get chances, goes 2 and out way, way too much so not only do they not hardly score which puts extra pressure on the defense, they lots of times don't move the ball almost at all. So the defense is asked to come out over and over again with little to no rest or come out in poor field position or both.

So I think its both ways. If your offense can't score or move the ball, maybe some of your defenders aren't playing as disciplined position wise wanting to make a play because they feel they have too plus they get worn down being on the field so much. But if the defense was better, maybe there isn't as much pressure on Ford, maybe the offense is more patient instead of potentially forcing things.

I do think when he has come in, even if it's limited. Fajardo has moved the ball some. So I would start Ford but it has to be a short leash because they need some positives here.

yup I think we are saying the same thing. I would start Ford but have an extremely short leash, I would even leave Fajardo in after short yardage plays for at least the next play. We have done our due diligence when it comes to making Ford feel like he doesn't have someone peeking over his shoulder but he regressed severely last game so its time to make him uncomfortable. that being said he did put a perfect game together the game prior so I think he deserves the start.

[Sectionq]

I'm not giving Ford a pass as he needs to be better for sure but when our defence is giving up:

• 32.4 points per game (next closest is Toronto at 27.5 and the league leader is Calgary at 17.2)
• 118.6 rushing yards per game, good enough for second last to BC who gives up 122.7. The league leader is Montreal at 69.8
• 330 Passing yards per game (next closest is Sask at 329.2 and the league leader is BC at 212.3)
• 443.6 yards of net offence (next closest is Sask at 384 and the league leader is Montreal at 321.2)
• We are last in sacks with 3, last in pass knockdowns with 10, we have ZERO forced fumbles

This is all while giving up an average time of possession of 33:40 (best is Sask at 28:21) and an average of 58 plays per game (Calgary is actually last with 61.8 and the league leader is BC at 51.1). Our D needs to be WAY better then it has been, that being said so does Ford and the whole offence as we do lead the league in 2 and outs with 43% compared to the league leader Sask at 24%.

Fair points, the defense hasn't been good at all which I wasn't expecting it to struggle this badly but even if the defense was better and say tied with the Argos for points per game allowed, the Elks through 5 games are averaging 23.6 that's with the 39 they put up against Ottawa that inflates their number. So they'd still be losing because they don't score enough. That games would be just closer.

The defense can't really stop anyone which is limiting the opportunities for the offense so that puts pressure on the offense and Ford but the offense when it does get chances, goes 2 and out way, way too much so not only do they not hardly score which puts extra pressure on the defense, they lots of times don't move the ball almost at all. So the defense is asked to come out over and over again with little to no rest or come out in poor field position or both.

So I think its both ways. If your offense can't score or move the ball, maybe some of your defenders aren't playing as disciplined position wise wanting to make a play because they feel they have too plus they get worn down being on the field so much. But if the defense was better, maybe there isn't as much pressure on Ford, maybe the offense is more patient instead of potentially forcing things.

I do think when he has come in, even if it's limited. Fajardo has moved the ball some. So I would start Ford but it has to be a short leash because they need some positives here.

[bone]

Great analysis, the difference for me lies in the expectations. The offence was expected to take time to come together while the D was expected to be dominant right away.

What we’ve seen play out is almost the reverse where the O, while still has plenty of work to do, have for the most part outperformed my expectations at times where as the D have failed miserably at living up to my expectations of them.

This is also my general view, but I do think blaming the defense for the BC game isn't fair. I think they did a reasonable job in limiting the damage, even though I hated how BC seemed to find the 5-7 yard play on every single play.

Let's not forget that despite Edmonton only having 1 first down between the first series and late in the 4th quarter. The defense played a huge part in keeping the game to a 10-7 score past the mid-point of the second quarter. They did fall apart in the final two drives of the 2nd quarter, but if the offense manages even 1 first down, or prefereably 2, there likely wouldn't have been enough time for a 2nd long drive and we're at worst 20-7.

Furthermore, in the 2nd half, the defense managed to limit BC to only 2 field goals all half, despite the Elks going 2 and out every drive until Fajardo late in the 4th.

Game 5 was pretty much what we would have been expecting going into the season with the Defense doing its best to limit the opposition and hoping the offense could capitalize on a few big plays, but the offense not only couldn't find any big plays, they couldn't even find many 10 yard plays. The defense even managed two turnovers which has been one of the two biggest issue this year as this team needed some turnovers to help the offense. The other being sacks which still is ridiculous that there's been so few.

[Esks4ever]

I'm not giving Ford a pass as he needs to be better for sure but when our defence is giving up:[LIST][*]118.6 rushing yards per game, good enough for second last to BC who gives up 122.7. The league leader is Montreal at 69.8[*]330 Passing yards per game (next closest is Sask at 329.2 and the league leader is BC at 212.3)
.

and our friggin game plan was to pass pass pass... no running attack whatso ever. Lemmie guess... our genius OC decided " they'll be expecting the run lets pass!!"

[ben_the_eskimo]

I'm not giving Ford a pass as he needs to be better for sure but when our defence is giving up:

• 32.4 points per game (next closest is Toronto at 27.5 and the league leader is Calgary at 17.2)
• 118.6 rushing yards per game, good enough for second last to BC who gives up 122.7. The league leader is Montreal at 69.8
• 330 Passing yards per game (next closest is Sask at 329.2 and the league leader is BC at 212.3)
• 443.6 yards of net offence (next closest is Sask at 384 and the league leader is Montreal at 321.2)
• We are last in sacks with 3, last in pass knockdowns with 10, we have ZERO forced fumbles

This is all while giving up an average time of possession of 33:40 (best is Sask at 28:21) and an average of 58 plays per game (Calgary is actually last with 61.8 and the league leader is BC at 51.1). Our D needs to be WAY better then it has been, that being said so does Ford and the whole offence as we do lead the league in 2 and outs with 43% compared to the league leader Sask at 24%.

Great analysis, the difference for me lies in the expectations. The offence was expected to take time to come together while the D was expected to be dominant right away.

What we’ve seen play out is almost the reverse where the O, while still has plenty of work to do, have for the most part outperformed my expectations at times where as the D have failed miserably at living up to my expectations of them.

[Looner]

I would agree that the defense hasn't been good what so ever.

Game 1, the Elks defense gave up 31 which isn't good but Ford only engineered 14 pts. You won't win very many games with that little offense.
Game 2 he definitely did enough to win. He produced 28 pts and passed for over 300 but the defense gave up 38 so I pin the loss on the defense.
Game 3 against the Bombers. He put up 23 pts, none in the 4th quarter when it matters. Defense again wasn't good so they are probably responsible for the loss but it's going to be tough to win when you only score 23 pts.
Game 4, the game they won. Defense again was poor but they won. They got a punt return TD which ended up being the reason they won. Plus scored on a long run so that helped. I think Ford was alright but only passed for 212 yards and in the CFL, I think you need a lot of help from other areas if your starter only passes for that little yardage which in this game, they did.
Game 5, only passed for 34 yards, they offence had 7 pts in 3 quarters with him playing. Can't win ever.

So I agree the defense is at fault for game 2 against the ALs.

The defense needed to be better in game 1 and game 5 against the Lions but at the same time, you won't win if your offense only scores 14 and if you are only scoring that few points, means your aren't creating drives, it's a ton of 2 and outs meaning your defense is on the field way, way too much which would contribute to them giving up yards and points. I thought in the Bombers game, the defense actually played decent for 3 quarters but couldn't stop the Bombers in the 4th but in saying that, the offense generated nothing. So how much of that is on the defense and how much of that is the offense unable to sustain any kind of drive to keep the defense off the field? I looked at the 4th quarter. Elks had the ball to start the 4th, 2 and out. Defense did give up a big play but held the Bombers to a field goal. Elks need a drive. Another 2 and out. Then a long TD drive by the Bombers. Elks respond with another 2 and out. Bombers get another field goal after a long drive.

So I am not pinning the losses on Ford but he's not helped the team anywhere close to enough. 2 games of 14 pts and another game with 23. You aren't going to get many wins scoring that little. At the very least, he can't keep doing 2 and out as much as he does. The defense has to get WAY better but they are also on the field way, way too much due to a lack of any kind of drives. Even if they don't score, your offense needs to at least move the ball some to give your defense a breather plus potentially not making them have to try to defend with a short field.

I'm not giving Ford a pass as he needs to be better for sure but when our defence is giving up:

• 32.4 points per game (next closest is Toronto at 27.5 and the league leader is Calgary at 17.2)
• 118.6 rushing yards per game, good enough for second last to BC who gives up 122.7. The league leader is Montreal at 69.8
• 330 Passing yards per game (next closest is Sask at 329.2 and the league leader is BC at 212.3)
• 443.6 yards of net offence (next closest is Sask at 384 and the league leader is Montreal at 321.2)
• We are last in sacks with 3, last in pass knockdowns with 10, we have ZERO forced fumbles

This is all while giving up an average time of possession of 33:40 (best is Sask at 28:21) and an average of 58 plays per game (Calgary is actually last with 61.8 and the league leader is BC at 51.1). Our D needs to be WAY better then it has been, that being said so does Ford and the whole offence as we do lead the league in 2 and outs with 43% compared to the league leader Sask at 24%.

[ben_the_eskimo]

I would agree that the defense hasn't been good what so ever.

Game 1, the Elks defense gave up 31 which isn't good but Ford only engineered 14 pts. You won't win very many games with that little offense.
Game 2 he definitely did enough to win. He produced 28 pts and passed for over 300 but the defense gave up 38 so I pin the loss on the defense.
Game 3 against the Bombers. He put up 23 pts, none in the 4th quarter when it matters. Defense again wasn't good so they are probably responsible for the loss but it's going to be tough to win when you only score 23 pts.
Game 4, the game they won. Defense again was poor but they won. They got a punt return TD which ended up being the reason they won. Plus scored on a long run so that helped. I think Ford was alright but only passed for 212 yards and in the CFL, I think you need a lot of help from other areas if your starter only passes for that little yardage which in this game, they did.
Game 5, only passed for 34 yards, they offence had 7 pts in 3 quarters with him playing. Can't win ever.

So I agree the defense is at fault for game 2 against the ALs.

The defense needed to be better in game 1 and game 5 against the Lions but at the same time, you won't win if your offense only scores 14 and if you are only scoring that few points, means your aren't creating drives, it's a ton of 2 and outs meaning your defense is on the field way, way too much which would contribute to them giving up yards and points. I thought in the Bombers game, the defense actually played decent for 3 quarters but couldn't stop the Bombers in the 4th but in saying that, the offense generated nothing. So how much of that is on the defense and how much of that is the offense unable to sustain any kind of drive to keep the defense off the field? I looked at the 4th quarter. Elks had the ball to start the 4th, 2 and out. Defense did give up a big play but held the Bombers to a field goal. Elks need a drive. Another 2 and out. Then a long TD drive by the Bombers. Elks respond with another 2 and out. Bombers get another field goal after a long drive.

So I am not pinning the losses on Ford but he's not helped the team anywhere close to enough. 2 games of 14 pts and another game with 23. You aren't going to get many wins scoring that little. At the very least, he can't keep doing 2 and out as much as he does. The defense has to get WAY better but they are also on the field way, way too much due to a lack of any kind of drives. Even if they don't score, your offense needs to at least move the ball some to give your defense a breather plus potentially not making them have to try to defend with a short field.

You’re right that Ford and the offence as a whole have a ways to go yet and are by no means a finished product but I feel there was improvement there every week u til last week.

So I’m not giving them a free pass but I feel like this team was built in the offseason to be strong defensively in order to buy the offence time to grow and this D has failed to hold up their end of that bargain.

I’d start Tre this week and see if he can bounce back but if he has another quarter or two like last game I’d start Cody in the second half. Not saying take the starters role away from him but just give him an opportunity to watch how Cody operates the offence for a half.

[Sectionq]

I agree you gotta do something but I don’t think Tre’s the reason we are 1-4, outside of last week he’s been good enough to win games all year, it’s the D that’s been costing us games.

The secondary has been atrocious, I’m starting to really dislike 16 and 13, 0 hasn’t been great either so I was glad to see they added a few new DBs to the roster this week.

I would agree that the defense hasn't been good what so ever.

Game 1, the Elks defense gave up 31 which isn't good but Ford only engineered 14 pts. You won't win very many games with that little offense.
Game 2 he definitely did enough to win. He produced 28 pts and passed for over 300 but the defense gave up 38 so I pin the loss on the defense.
Game 3 against the Bombers. He put up 23 pts, none in the 4th quarter when it matters. Defense again wasn't good so they are probably responsible for the loss but it's going to be tough to win when you only score 23 pts.
Game 4, the game they won. Defense again was poor but they won. They got a punt return TD which ended up being the reason they won. Plus scored on a long run so that helped. I think Ford was alright but only passed for 212 yards and in the CFL, I think you need a lot of help from other areas if your starter only passes for that little yardage which in this game, they did.
Game 5, only passed for 34 yards, they offence had 7 pts in 3 quarters with him playing. Can't win ever.

So I agree the defense is at fault for game 2 against the ALs.

The defense needed to be better in game 1 and game 5 against the Lions but at the same time, you won't win if your offense only scores 14 and if you are only scoring that few points, means your aren't creating drives, it's a ton of 2 and outs meaning your defense is on the field way, way too much which would contribute to them giving up yards and points. I thought in the Bombers game, the defense actually played decent for 3 quarters but couldn't stop the Bombers in the 4th but in saying that, the offense generated nothing. So how much of that is on the defense and how much of that is the offense unable to sustain any kind of drive to keep the defense off the field? I looked at the 4th quarter. Elks had the ball to start the 4th, 2 and out. Defense did give up a big play but held the Bombers to a field goal. Elks need a drive. Another 2 and out. Then a long TD drive by the Bombers. Elks respond with another 2 and out. Bombers get another field goal after a long drive.

So I am not pinning the losses on Ford but he's not helped the team anywhere close to enough. 2 games of 14 pts and another game with 23. You aren't going to get many wins scoring that little. At the very least, he can't keep doing 2 and out as much as he does. The defense has to get WAY better but they are also on the field way, way too much due to a lack of any kind of drives. Even if they don't score, your offense needs to at least move the ball some to give your defense a breather plus potentially not making them have to try to defend with a short field.

[ben_the_eskimo]

I actually think Rouke is not an elite QB against other teams but he enjoys Elk meat. Just puts this team on a grill. Best games statistically against us and after that he goes back to being mediocre.
FIRE JC NOW.

Everyone on that D needs to be better including JC but to fire him now 5 games into his career as a play caller at the pro level would be asinine. If anything we should be looking to add someone to the defensive coaching staff because right now it’s basically just JC and Grymes.

My tweaks would be to have Kilam take over the role of STC to allow Maxie to move over to the D as a full time DL coach and the bring in another D coach to coach the LBs so JC can focus on just being a DC.

Then, start looking for replacements for Bynum and Jackson because they’re afraid to tackle (which ain’t JCs fault) and then pray that some how the DL can improve despite the fact we’ve probably lost our best Dlineman long term.

The LBs have been the only decent part of our D the rest has been hot garbage.

[ben_the_eskimo]

I think that's smart. I don't think you can come off a performance like last game and not do anything different. Putting up 34 yards total of passing yardage in 3 quarters of football IMO is really hard to do.

I agree you gotta do something but I don’t think Tre’s the reason we are 1-4, outside of last week he’s been good enough to win games all year, it’s the D that’s been costing us games.

The secondary has been atrocious, I’m starting to really dislike 16 and 13, 0 hasn’t been great either so I was glad to see they added a few new DBs to the roster this week.

[Sectionq]

sounds like they are both getting first team reps today, so there is going to be an increase in CF playing time this week, I'm sure

I think that's smart. I don't think you can come off a performance like last game and not do anything different. Putting up 34 yards total of passing yardage in 3 quarters of football IMO is really hard to do.

[Looner]

I also think there is some value in giving Fajardo some snaps just to put pressure on Ford. The team has to develop him so there is some blame for the previous years. The OC can do a better job coming up with plays and game plans that help BUT there is some onus on Ford just to perform. When the OC calls a play that works, the Oline gives you time, the receiver gets open and you miss a throw, that's on him to make the damn throw. At some point Ford just needs to flat out play better.

He was told months ago he was the starter which at the time I agreed with but maybe seeing the other QB get a few snaps and potentially produce might motivate him to buckle down some and play better.

sounds like they are both getting first team reps today, so there is going to be an increase in CF playing time this week, I'm sure

[Brock my Rock]

I actually think Rouke is not an elite QB against other teams but he enjoys Elk meat. Just puts this team on a grill. Best games statistically against us and after that he goes back to being mediocre.
FIRE JC NOW.

[Esks4ever]

I'm not sure why coaches are so loathe to put in the backup. It seems to have become taboo over the past decade or so. I remember a time when a starter was routinely pulled to watch from the sidelines for a series or two, or even longer. And it was to the benefit of the team. If there wasn't a better time to put Fajardo into a game than at halftime last week, then I don't even know why he's on the roster. He's an established CFL winner. I see no downside to putting him in the game when Tre is clearly struggling. If it's about Tre's ego, then we have a really big problem and Hervey needs to deal with it STAT. Quite honestly, it seems the fans have anointed Tre as the starter, but I'm not so sure the coaching staff is really buying it. It's a very strange situation.

I have no issues with CF going in... gives Ford a chance to see what the D is doing from the sidelines....


My friend thought about this: He wonders if the Elks are so scared to yank/sit Ford because he is entertaining and maybe a reason why people would come to a game. I'll admit I find him entertaining and I want to see him do the things he can ( even though I feel he's being held back - maybe on purpose to have fans get tired/mad at him making the switch to CF easier to swallow)

Interesting Idea - nothing would shock me anymore.. but I said to him... Winning will bring people more than a gimmick QB. I just hope we can win with Ford...

[Esks4ever]

The positive is that through the first 4 games Ford was showing progress every week, but this game was a disaster for him, maybe his worst performance ever….

Which unfortunately might be part of the process.

How many years was VA an awful starting QB for before he finally turned into what he is today?

this maybe a unpopular opinion... but I see a lot of similarities between "The all Mighty super hyped up" Rourke and Ford.... Missed throws, off target, picked off... however Rourke's upside and overall ability is light years better than Ford's..


I'd like to see the Elks utalize Ford running ability more... draws, sally rands, rollouts... let him use his best ability to help with his throwing... you dont need to play "sandlot ball" to see ford do ford things.. but for the love of god.. help him improve instead of stapling his ass into a pocket passer. It should be steps forward not backwards...that IMO partly falls on the OC He's a mobile QB.. use him.


This is criminal:

Rankin rush yards 239 friggin yards on 41 carries.. 6 games..... Leader is DOUBLE the amount of carries....