WBBFanWest

Two comments that are incredibly douchy, but not surprising.

"I'm sure he could find a role" = maybe he already did, with Ottawa. Not everyone has an ego that demands that they be "top dog" and nothing else. As you get older, you often start to realize that taking a lesser role doesn't make you a lesser person.

Guys that don't have the ego of a 15 year old? Because paycheque > no paycheque.

I think that this is not a "suddenly" issue. His defense has been suspect for two full seasons now. I suspect that it might be as simple as his system just doesn't work as well as it might have in the past. Things change/evolve and maybe he hasn't.

Welcome to the CFL salary system. It's a part of the reality of things. You will sometimes have to sacrifice a bit of talent in order to save money. The trick seems to be: whoever can best hide their weakest link wins.

With 1 year contracts being the norm, there will always be changes from year to year. Every other team in the league is dealing with the same issue though, so you really can't use that as an excuse.

I think at some point, you have to make a change at the top. One can always argue that if there was just a bit more talent, or a bit more time to gel, or a bit more depth then things will really start to click. While any of those things might be true, ultimately the issues on D stop at the desk of the coordinator. I really don't see our defense, talent wise, as significantly worse off that the rest of the league, so the fact that we're at the bottom of the pack in a lot of significant markers says something, so I really think that our D should be better than it is. Your right that it does not good sacrificing someone for no good reason, but in this case, we are not making that last big step that we need to make. You can fiddle with the roster forever, or you can change the system. Personally, I'd like to see what a new system can do and I really don't think that Hall is the one that needs to do it.

What? Were you saying something?

When one has only a single item agenda, everything sounds the same. Try the ignore, you won't miss anything.

That would be good but I really think we can't expect him to get them much more than half the time.

Obviously, if we're going to replace Hall, we have to hire Doug Brown as our new DC because: 1) He's a former Bomber. 2) an All-Star which means that he just "knows" everything a good coach would need to know. 3) And most importantly, we know his name.

The only choice? No, but it was the choice that was made, FOUR YEARS AGO. So if you are still whining about this after this long, the issue is not who they hired, it's about who's looking back at you in the mirror.

You know what? When they were first hired I was as vocal as anyone about how I saw this as a really bad idea. Walters was hired because he was down the hall from Miller and was therefore, cheap. O'Shea was hired because he had a pretty thin resume and would be, yep, cheap. I figured that their regime would be more of the same, floundering, failure and eventually, replacement. But after 4 years, I'm happy to admit that I was wrong. Is Walters the best GM ever? No, but he's certainly done a good job in drafting and acquiring national talent. Ya he needs to do a better job with his scouts in unearthing US based players, but I'd rather have it this way than the Mack way. And O'Shea had grown into what appears to be a pretty good head coach. Not Cal Murphy good, but he's still got ceiling to reach, I think. Moral of the story: you need to let this "hiring rookies" crap go. We hired rookies four years ago, but we don't have rookies anymore. Let it go and find some other windmill to tilt at.

Why would they be showing videos of Gordie Howe at the Bobby Orr museum?

Don't see a ton of people beating down his door today though. Higgins is at best a tier 2 level HC. At best. If anyone is holding him up as an example of a quality coach with experience, then Kevin Glenn is a quality experienced QB. By the way, Higgins has won a grand total of 1 Grey Cup as a HC in nine seasons. Seven of those season were with Edmonton and Calgary, so I'm not sure where you're getting this "bad organizational politics" stuff from. That's not exactly screaming "quality".

No worries, I had a few moments and I know how to use a calculator. I'm glad that you've indicated that it was a "throw away post". Gotta keep that post count up, I guess. Good job!

Interesting, you have 85 recorded losses vs 77 wins over 81 games. Should prove to be a very interesting season indeed.

So tell me if you would, how exactly do you hire the right people in the first place? Do you have some sort of fool proof method of knowing that a particular coach/gm, is "the right one". Honestly, you're embarrassing yourself with silliness like that comment. Maybe we should just hire people on a one year basis? Win the Cup in your first year or you're done because clearly, if you didn't win it all right away, you weren't "the right one". Or maybe we should give them two years and allow them one gimme? We were in the hiring churn for a long long time, and you can see (I hope) what that got us. So maybe, your strategy of firing people every two or three years, trying to find the "right one" isn't as smart a strategy as you thought? The evidence clearly points that out, but again, never let facts get in the way. Here's a fairly radical thought: maybe we should hire people and as long as they continue to trend up, keep them around? You know, sort of what we're actually doing.

Firstly, I think they've made it very clear, on many occasions, that the goal is a Cup. Unfortunately, they can't just wave a magic wand and make it happen. Also, although saying this won't stop anyone from yet again bemoaning "the streak", you cannot blame the current regime for the fact that we haven't won the Cup since 1990. The past four years, and only those years are in their control. But please, don't let logic get in the way of a good rant.

It's easy to say what other people should do when it's not your butt on the line. Ambrosie will, if he's smart, listen to the advice of the CFL's legal council on this. Just because he's guarding his words carefully does not mean that he doesn't care, nor does it mean that he's not working to find a solution. Of course, he could just follow the advice of the legal beagles on this board and then we'll all pat ourselves on the back when the CFL does its part to prevent any further injuries by going into insolvency.

Except that in Saskatchewan, finding the homeliest person in the room might not be a easy task.

Mr Reilly, if you're going to go 19th century, then go 19th century. Don't half-ass it.

Every spot in TC should be used to find the best talent available. There should be no "throw-away" spots. So if that's the case, if the Bomber scouts can't find better prospects that Greg "Remember that game a long time ago when I was good" Carr, Walters needs to find better scouts. So please, no Carr.

Oh God, please no. We'd look like the sad-sack Bombers of old. Bringing in a marginal player several years after his best before date. We can do better. We have to do better.