third quarter thoughts
Part of me wants to not write, to let things settle to get some perspective. Another part of me is incensed.
Part of me wants to buy into the mantra that 10 and 8 with a semi-final win is OK, and an improvement over the last two years of pain. But – I know better.
Another part is saying that if Edmonton had won today, a naysayer like me would have had to be quiet. But … the Esks didn’t win.
Thanks to so many of you for posting your insightful comments about today’s game, DM and the Esks in general. It lets me know that I am not alone, and gives me the strength to post the following.
Some thoughts that I typed during the third quarter.
- Eskimo D tires as game progresses
- Eskimo secondary full of holes, no longer much of a pass rush
- Eskimo O no real deep threat for pass
- Eskimo O zero running game
- RR neither runs, nor rolls out. He is a "sitting duck" in a collapsing pocket, against a Montreal D that knows Edmonton will be looking for the short to medium pass on almost every play
Eskimo coaching - no visible adjustments during game, nothing new brought to the game, same old same old all season long, year after year.
Giving up the safety. Up just 13 to 3 early on and they give up a safety for "field position"? To do this Edmonton actually took a penalty for a time count violation so that they could get closer to their own goal line to make the subsequent concession easier. Then, the kicker did not concede right away, but ran around in the end zone to run time off of the clock. Unless he could have run for five minutes, it wouldn’t have impacted Montreal’s chance to come back and score.
Before the game Maciocia was being interviewed by TSN as if he had rebuilt the Esks - and that they were back as a force to be reckoned with. As far as I can see, for his entire tenure as coach DM has been riding RR's arm. DM has not capitalized on the many other players and opportunities that he has had. There has not been much “rebuilding”. On Offense - same quarterback, same short passing game, still no running game. A lot of new faces on O and D – but is that rebuilding, or just refilling the bench? Worse, Maciocia seemed to put down his predecessors in Edmonton. He said that in Edmonton they used to “reload not rebuild”. Well, coach, during the unbroken streak of three and a half decades of continuous playoff appearances it seems obvious that the team must have been rebuilt many times over yet – unlike DM’s reign - remained competitive and successful.
Part of me wants to buy into the mantra that 10 and 8 with a semi-final win is OK, and an improvement over the last two years of pain. But – I know better.
Another part is saying that if Edmonton had won today, a naysayer like me would have had to be quiet. But … the Esks didn’t win.
Thanks to so many of you for posting your insightful comments about today’s game, DM and the Esks in general. It lets me know that I am not alone, and gives me the strength to post the following.
Some thoughts that I typed during the third quarter.
- Eskimo D tires as game progresses
- Eskimo secondary full of holes, no longer much of a pass rush
- Eskimo O no real deep threat for pass
- Eskimo O zero running game
- RR neither runs, nor rolls out. He is a "sitting duck" in a collapsing pocket, against a Montreal D that knows Edmonton will be looking for the short to medium pass on almost every play
Eskimo coaching - no visible adjustments during game, nothing new brought to the game, same old same old all season long, year after year.
Giving up the safety. Up just 13 to 3 early on and they give up a safety for "field position"? To do this Edmonton actually took a penalty for a time count violation so that they could get closer to their own goal line to make the subsequent concession easier. Then, the kicker did not concede right away, but ran around in the end zone to run time off of the clock. Unless he could have run for five minutes, it wouldn’t have impacted Montreal’s chance to come back and score.
Before the game Maciocia was being interviewed by TSN as if he had rebuilt the Esks - and that they were back as a force to be reckoned with. As far as I can see, for his entire tenure as coach DM has been riding RR's arm. DM has not capitalized on the many other players and opportunities that he has had. There has not been much “rebuilding”. On Offense - same quarterback, same short passing game, still no running game. A lot of new faces on O and D – but is that rebuilding, or just refilling the bench? Worse, Maciocia seemed to put down his predecessors in Edmonton. He said that in Edmonton they used to “reload not rebuild”. Well, coach, during the unbroken streak of three and a half decades of continuous playoff appearances it seems obvious that the team must have been rebuilt many times over yet – unlike DM’s reign - remained competitive and successful.
Comment