WBBFanWest

We aren't discussing whether or not he would be a good DC. Just whether or not it would be unrealistic to expect him to know how to Design a Defense along with another DC (Etch), which is what your original statement was. That it would be unrealistic to assume so. I'm simply stating that since he's already shown he can take on field experience and transfer that to a playbook via Special teams. It isn't unrealistic that he could also do that for a Defense. Whether or not it would work out is another discussion all together. If he were a former DC at any level then I'd agree with you. As he wasn't I don't. So only DC's can recognize or design defensive schemes then? I'm betting that lots of defensive position coaches can, to various degrees do it, and I'm willing to bet that some players can too. I know this because there is no "magic" that happens once someone is named defensive coordinator. They are not suddenly able to do things that they couldn't do before, it's just that they are now being paid and given the responsibility for doing it. So does O'shea have a background that might allow him to help a DC put together a defensive package? Of course he does. Arguing that he doesn't is just plain silly. Would O'Shea be really good at doing it? Maybe, maybe not. Nope, you're just not getting it and going way off on a tangent. Expecting a HC with 4 years coaching experience total, none of it as a DC, to fix Etch's schemes when he's been a coach since 1980 and a DC since 1994 is ridiculous. No GM, even ours, would expect that to happen. If our HC was an ex-DC, then expecting him to help and fix Etch's schemes would be realistic. I always enjoy reading your responses because you really do try so very hard to move the point of the argument around as much as possible. If you were in charge of setting up the goal posts for CFL games, you'd have them on dollies.

We aren't discussing whether or not he would be a good DC. Just whether or not it would be unrealistic to expect him to know how to Design a Defense along with another DC (Etch), which is what your original statement was. That it would be unrealistic to assume so. I'm simply stating that since he's already shown he can take on field experience and transfer that to a playbook via Special teams. It isn't unrealistic that he could also do that for a Defense. Whether or not it would work out is another discussion all together. If he were a former DC at any level then I'd agree with you. As he wasn't I don't. So only DC's can recognize or design defensive schemes then? I'm betting that lots of defensive position coaches can, to various degrees do it, and I'm willing to bet that some players can too. I know this because there is no "magic" that happens once someone is named defensive coordinator. They are not suddenly able to do things that they couldn't do before, it's just that they are now being paid and given the responsibility for doing it. So does O'shea have a background that might allow him to help a DC put together a defensive package? Of course he does. Arguing that he doesn't is just plain silly. Would O'Shea be really good at doing it? Maybe, maybe not.

Okay then why was MB fired? He had no decent qb to work with according to you. Like somehow Nicholls was a piece of crap?? Why is it okay to use that excuse with MOS but not MB? He lost his field general but somehow he's a shitty coach & O'Shea isn't? #fansdoublestandard Because maybe O'Shea believes that his OC, the man tasked with designing and running the offence did not do a good enough job in protecting Willy or adjusting the system to help out the quarterbacks that followed. Edit> Dang, ninja'ed by a goalie... Mike O'Shea the Teflon Man. Canned 3 coordinators but nothing sticks to him. Pretty flimsy reason WBBFanWest. At some point, he has to be held responsible for lousy coaching hires. But not yet, I guess. I 'm sure he probably has 2 or 3 more staff firings left in him before the Positrons realize the guy is a lousy HC.. Or, we could just rage about it incessantly because that makes a ton more sense and looks way more intelligent. Yeah because you know it's not right. That all the **** falls on every other coach on staff but O'Shea. So much for the Captain being in charge & having any responsibilty. The absolute glee around here on Monday that Bellefeuille was fired & MOS was kept because Willy got hurt is so ridiculous. A few points: - I didn't see anyone here that I would describe as "gleeful" that MB was let go and O'Shea was kept. What I saw was a lot of people very happy the MB was gone, period. - Just because others are not braying nonstop of their desire to see O'Shea fired doesn't mean that they don't have concerns. For example, I've been concerned about O'Shea ever since he announced that Etch and MB would be his DC and OC. I didn't think that those were good hires. Turns out, they weren't. I'm still concerned, but seeing that it appears that he's going to be here next year, I really don't see that much purpose in doing what you seem to be doing, spewing anti-O'Shea stuff in every thread you possibly can. We get it, you don't like O'Shea, but I think that your continual raging just makes you look silly and it's not like Walters is going to read your posts and say "Wow, iso_55 really doesn't like Mike. I guess I better do something about that right away." - Here's how I'm approaching this situation: I'm not sold that O'Shea is the right guy for the job, but seeing that he's there and I want the Bombers to be successful, I'm going to have to hope that O'Shea finally gets rolling in year 3. Because to desire otherwise means that I'm actually wanting the Bombers to fail, and I would hope that no fan would have that sort of attitude.

Okay then why was MB fired? He had no decent qb to work with according to you. Like somehow Nicholls was a piece of crap?? Why is it okay to use that excuse with MOS but not MB? He lost his field general but somehow he's a shitty coach & O'Shea isn't? #fansdoublestandard Because maybe O'Shea believes that his OC, the man tasked with designing and running the offence did not do a good enough job in protecting Willy or adjusting the system to help out the quarterbacks that followed. Edit> Dang, ninja'ed by a goalie... Mike O'Shea the Teflon Man. Canned 3 coordinators but nothing sticks to him. Pretty flimsy reason WBBFanWest. At some point, he has to be held responsible for lousy coaching hires. But not yet, I guess. I 'm sure he probably has 2 or 3 more staff firings left in him before the Positrons realize the guy is a lousy HC.. Or, we could just rage about it incessantly because that makes a ton more sense and looks way more intelligent.

Okay then why was MB fired? He had no decent qb to work with according to you. Like somehow Nicholls was a piece of crap?? Why is it okay to use that excuse with MOS but not MB? He lost his field general but somehow he's a shitty coach & O'Shea isn't? #fansdoublestandard Because maybe O'Shea believes that his OC, the man tasked with designing and running the offence did not do a good enough job in protecting Willy or adjusting the system to help out the quarterbacks that followed. Edit> Dang, ninja'ed by a goalie...

Reading some of these comments reminds me how much harder it must be to be a real GM, with real demands and real decisions to make without using hindsight as your main tool.

Normally I don't like to celebrate someone else's misfortune, but having said that... And good on O'Shea for not having to do the "long walk in the snow" before deciding the obvious.

So is your post because you are talking about Walters...

We're 5 and 13. No one should be guaranteed a spot.

Why not? Lets tighten the foil hats and suppose Miller would only hire a gm who agrees to keep O'Shea. Then you you only get a shitty GM who is so desperate for the job he will do whatever he needs to do to get that job... A great GM will have to be able to run his team his way Paging Mr Taman, Mr Brendan Taman

Mike Kelly was right about us the same way that I'm right when I say that Bomber fans need air or they'll die. All he was doing was stating the obvious about any team's fan base. Here's a rule of thumb I've used for a while now and it's never steered me wrong; when looking for insightful thoughts, the words of Mike Kelly aren't

I would suspect that Buchko, like most executives, would have a clause in their contract which gives them a buyout upon leaving the organization. The only exception to that, normally, is when someone is released for cause (ie. they broke the law, repeated violated company policy etc.). So in pretty much most other instances, the CEO gets a package when they leave. Sorry to disappoint, but in the business world, they usually try to keep the humiliation and drama that you seem to desperately crave to a minimum. Makes hiring the next guy a whole lot easier.

Yes he resigned. The board would have, most likely, told him that they had lost confidence in him. His resignation would have been pretty much automatic at that point. it's the way it's done in much of the business world with people at that level. But then again, I would have thought a "Dr" would understand that.

Couple of points: 1) concerning Lawrence, it was a legal hit, so that means, by definition, it wasn't dirty. 2) he's running in the open field and clearly sees the defender coming. That's hardly vulnerable. 3) if Burris has concerns about his career (which is already long by any standard) then either throw the ball away or hook slide. You don't attempt to make a play and then whine afterwards that the big meannie had the audacity to do what he's being payed to do. That has less to do with courage than it has to do with "star" entitlement. He wants to try and make the big play and then gets mad because someone on the other side doesn't let him. Boo hoo Hank, boo hoo.

No not at all. The BoD does what it does, Miller does what he does. They didn't "indirectly" hire anyone. I lend you my car. You run someone over. Did I indirectlyn them over? So, Miller answers to absolutely no one? Who fired Butchko? Who hired Miller? Of course Miller answers to the BoD. That he answers to the BoD does not make the BoD directly or indirectly responsible for the decisions he makes. You're asking one question and trying to use the answer to frame an entirely different question. No, and this where I was confused by your answers. I wasn't trying to be a smart ass with you. I went back to 2013 & the BOD's hired Miller but it is my understanding Miller then fired Butchko as strange as that seemed. Now, I may have that wrong as well. I just wanted to clarify that Miller has autonomy to make decisions on behalf of the Board in hirings & firings but he does serve at the pleasure of the Blue Bombers BODs. they can fire him if they see fit. He does ultimately answer to them. . You were. Buchko resigned. Miller was then hired as CEO and in turn, he fired Mack.

I'm sort of in the camp that thinks that if you are afraid of getting hit, badminton or bowling might be more your thing. In the pocket you can only hit the QB above the knee to the shoulder already, so I'm not sure what more can be reasonably done that wouldn't alter the game too much. At the same time, it seems more than a bit disingenuous for Burris to be out there scrambling, trying to make a play and then complain when a defender is trying to do the same thing, make a play. So maybe part of the onus needs to be on teaching the QB's to do things to avoid getting hit. They could bring in Brock Ralph to be a special adviser to the league because there was no one better than him for that sort of stuff. PS: A football player over forty making over 400K a season whining about putting food on his table broke my irony meter.

I get what Lawless is saying, but at the same time, it's football. On that particular play, Burris was no longer just a QB. He was playing the role of a running back, which means that he should be able to be legally tackled in the same manner as any other ball carrier. To start saying that there will be different rules for contacting a QB in all cases, regardless of what they are doing is just silly. They could just as easily make the QB's wear flags and say no tackling them ever. Yes, QB's are important, but it's still supposed to be football.

I was wondering the same thing last week, this guy is virtually invisible. I wonder if he actually spends anytime in Canada. What?!? Orridge is an American who just got his Canadian citizenship. He made sure he was seen on television at one of the Liberal candidate's soiree's election night in Toronto. Interviewed on CBC that night. I know that. He's lived in Canada for around 10 years which is why I said "what?!?" to the ridiculous comment I bolder. Why is it ridiculous? The guy is the Invisible Man. Maybe he goes camping on weekends during the season? Maybe he's been building a deck all season at home. Hey, maybe we should fire him too. FIRE "EM ALL!!!!!!

Once doesn't make it traditionally. They did that after Bauer left as an over-reaction to giving Bauer too much power. They also did it because of the absence of a CEO. That's one of those rare times when a board does get involved in hiring below the CEO because someone's gotta do it/

If you're suggesting that they would fire Miller because he didn't nail it on his first try at hiring a GM, you might be setting your goals just a bit too high. Keep in mind that the CEO does other things besides hire a GM, so it's possible that maybe he's meeting expectations on a lot of other things. I know that on a board like this it's real easy to yell "fire him" every time someone decides that there's a problem, but the people who are having to operate in the real world actually do things in a bit more rational fashion. Sorry to disappoint. Okay then, then who hires & fires Miller? Sme mystic wizard from Harry Potter? It would appear that either you have a hard time following a discussion, or you're being deliberately obtuse. I'm pointing out the abserdity of your argument and you're responding with a rather sad attempt at sarcasm with the Harry Potter stuff. I realize that complaining is really your forte, but I was hoping for some small amount of substance within the rants. It's appearing to me that all you intend to do is yell "fire them, fire them all". Not going to waste anymore time trying to explain things to someone who is doing his very best to actually avoid rationality.

The only way that ad-hoc committees of the BoD get involved with this stuff is if the CEO allows it, which he shouldn't. And whenever I here the word "traditionally" alarm bells go off. How do you know of this tradition? Who started it? Does it still go on, or is it one of those, "we did it once/a long time ago so that must mean we always do it that way" sorts of things.

If you're suggesting that they would fire Miller because he didn't nail it on his first try at hiring a GM, you might be setting your goals just a bit too high. Keep in mind that the CEO does other things besides hire a GM, so it's possible that maybe he's meeting expectations on a lot of other things. I know that on a board like this it's real easy to yell "fire him" every time someone decides that there's a problem, but the people who are having to operate in the real world actually do things in a bit more rational fashion. Sorry to disappoint.

No not at all. The BoD does what it does, Miller does what he does. They didn't "indirectly" hire anyone. I lend you my car. You run someone over. Did I indirectlyn them over? So, Miller answers to absolutely no one? Who fired Butchko? Who hired Miller? Of course Miller answers to the BoD. That he answers to the BoD does not make the BoD directly or indirectly responsible for the decisions he makes. You're asking one question and trying to use the answer to frame an entirely different question.

Yes. And if they want to fire Miller they can do it. you can quote it three times, but that won't magically make you right.

No not at all. The BoD does what it does, Miller does what he does. They didn't "indirectly" hire anyone. I lend you my car. You run someone over. Did I indirectly run them over?