TBURGESS

Yuuuuup! I'd bring in Huffer to do both jobs in a heartbeat. Then again, I'd replace Walters with Murphy and O'Shea with whoever Murphy thought would be good too.

PLAP eh? Not really surprised and not impressed. Not looking forward to vanilla offences and playing not to lose. Is the 3rd time really the charm? I wonder if he keeps some or all of the offensive coaches for continuity? That would certainly be easier and cheaper assuming they have already have contracts for next year. Another boring hire of a failed coach.

Spirit of Edmonton's usually one of the best parties in GC week. Have fun guys.

I know that Murphy's been the asst GM with Huff as the GM. What's changed is Huff is giving up the coaching part of his job which means Murphy will be doing a lot less of the GM job in Calgary next year. I don't see any need for Calgary to keep Murphy around now that Huff can devote all his time to the GM job.

Looks like Murphy's available now that Huff's moving upstairs. I'd prefer him over Walters and he won't be available next year assuming he's the Riders GM. Time to rethink our strategy of keeping Walters around?

He also probably wants to beat Hamilton. Not sure why people dislike him so much, even if he's had some bad games in big spots, he's one of the best players in league history, and seems like a good guy. even tells opposition players "good hit" and so on. also don't get the Ottawa hate. coaches seem like good guys, they obviously know what they're doing, not a dirty team. head scratcher. also one of Hamilton's best D lineman is out, I heard. Mostly sour grapes because we're not playing this week.

Randle is a great corner. Leggett's the better dime.

Welcome to the 1 year contract era. Most of the good ones will be re-signed by their own teams before they ever hit Free Agency.

You know what, I don't think it's are serious as all that. Yeah they didn't win a championship, but Milt Stegall (and the rest of the great players around when he was) made a lot of football fans in Winnipeg. Those are people in my age bracket (or just a bit below) who became fans watching one of the best players ever and they're in that age now where they are having families which likely passes the tradition of being a fan down. Sure there's probably not a lot of under 25s but really in the grand scheme of things that's not too big a deal. The thing gets turned around they'll jump on the band wagon too. No, I think burgess is blind. Every game ive been to has a ton of 20-25 year olds at them.. They are a well represented demographic. Younger adults as well, male and female. Not sure where burg gets his idea from. Maybe the younger ones are up in the deck due to cheapness.. I also want to point out that on game day, all I see are bomber jerseys and flags. At work. At the mall and big box stores.. There is no doubt in my mind that this team will not be leaving in 10,20 or 30 years. Lastly, I mentioned it in a different thread but fans of the jets and bombers suffer from anxiety and panic proneness. Its never as bad as the vocal minority seem to make it out to be. (Yes I realize its not sunshine and rainbows like others also try to convey) its very much inbetween somewhere the 2 rabid groups of fans. All I can see is the faces on TV and most of them look pretty damn old. Maybe the youngsters are at the rum hut or in the cheap seats so the TV cameras don't show them as much.

I don't see how any of the under 25 set are still Bomber fans. They've never seen a GC win. We've only been 1st twice since 1995 and out of the playoffs 11 times. That's a completely lost generation of Winnipeg football fans. Take a good close look at who's in the stands. On TV it looks like mostly 55+ with a lot of 70+ folks who are still there because they've always gone to games. A few more bad years and selling season tickets will be like pulling teeth. I suspect it's already there now.

Westerman certainly deserves it more and I think he'll win it but in this day and age, the 'story' often trumps everything. Sinopoli has a great back story. Canadian QB who got a shot with Calgary who changed positions to receiver to be able to play who then went 'home' to Ottawa to have his breakout year get 1000 yards helping to lead his team to first place in the east.

Big advantage to the ignore function is if you ignore enough posters, you can fool yourself into thinking that 'everyone' agrees with you. Some people put nothing but a positive spin on everything. When we sign someone they are the greatest signing ever no matter what kind of baggage they may bring with them. Every decision made by the current regime is good and everyone who's cut is garbage. Our record doesn't matter if it's bad because it can be wished away by blaming the refs or changing a few important plays during the game or explained away with 'what if' scenarios. I honestly think that if we missed the playoffs 4 years in a row they'd still want to keep the current regime, would only type about the good things and would complain about everyone who doesn't share their opinions. They start arguments about who's a better fan and call out other posters with 'Eat Crow' and 'I told you so' and 'See I was right all along' after wins or when under performing players have 1 good game. They often attack the posters instead of the post. They create a lot of arguments in the name of positivity almost forcing rebuttals. They contend that the so called negative posters wouldn't be happy with a good season followed by a grey cup, which is so far from the truth as to be laughable. The negativity stems from the poor play and poor records. All that being said, I haven't 'ignored' any posters. Seeing both sides of all things Bombers is important to discussion of the issues. An 'all things rainbows, lolipops and unicorns' wouldn't hold my interest any more than an 'all gloom and doom' would.

Hall had no other choices than Winnipeg if he wanted to be a CFL DC. We paid Westerman more than other teams offered. Turned out to be money well spent. We overpaid Picard and Moore too. Didn't turn out as well. The blog is by the Bombers Director of Communications. It's designed to present the most positive view of the team. It's the Bomber view of how things are in Bomberland, not a non-partisan view. I'd like to see us go outside our comfort zone and pay a good experienced OC enough to get them to come to the Peg, but I fear that ISO's right and we'll end up with a newbie OC or one who doesn't have a very good resume.

I believe it's walk the talk. And your analysis about fixing problems tends to overlook the actual complexities/challenges of putting a championship team. Yes Walters is fair game to criticism but not to unrealistic standards. Championship team? Are you crazy? Folks around here would settle for an average team that makes the playoffs and that's not an unrealistic standard.

Walters does great media. Sounds like he knows what he's talking about. Doesn't talk down to the media. Doesn't answer their questions preferring to stay on his talking points, but isn't obnoxious about it. Very agreeable. Should be up there monthly with a state of the team address.

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.

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.

O'Shea was a great MLB and a great STC, but he's never tried to be a DC so we really don't know if he can do that job or not. You can assume he can, but then again most folks assumed he'd be a great HC and he's been a bust so far.

O'Shea's never been a DC so it would be unrealistic for them to expect he'd be able to fix Etch's D by mid-season. I disagree. Due to his experience as a player. He has been a part of some great defenses. And if you hear his former team mates speak, he was basically a coach on the field. He knows the CFL defense and could design one if needed. I have a hard time believing a future HOF MLB wouldn't know how. Especially one that spent basically his entire life around the Canadian game. MO was a great MLB no question about it but being part of great defences and designing great defences are two totally different skillsets.

There were other options that could have been choosen from...ones that all we needed to do was offer some $$ and make it a non-lateral move from where they were and it could have happened. But they chose Hall, and he didn't come at a low ball salary either. He was a good and I think right hire to re-establish a sense of a usefull CFL defence. There was really nothing wrong with his schemes and his game adjustments, more a matter of a couple players shy of really having a good defence, and the fact that it was a new system and an obvious learning curve for all. Next year I bet people will be raving about or defence. Pretty sure Oshea knows MB was not the guy to bring us forward but when Willy went down we were handcuffed (especially before we got Nichols) and trying to install a new system amd philosophy with a stable of relative rookie or green to the CFL quarterbacks and not really being experienced with what to look for, how to attack and how to adjust to the Canadian game would have been an utter disaster of massive proportions and would have hurt us moving forward bigtime and made this place look like a looney bin organization. Sticking with MB was the only choice and Oshea used great judgement and a set of balls to take the heat and if it came to it fall on the sword for the organization and his players. One of the reasons that he is loved and respected by players, and not just on the Bombers and why guys never really quit on him. The players we want to keep never did and the few that looked like they were slacking off are probably already decided upon as not being back anyway. The fault of this team for years has been to keep throwing consistancy and dedicated time into things, bringing us to where we are the last decade. I always like your posts. Well thought out and presented. That being said.... I agree that Hall was a good hire. He was my second choice behind Benevides because I prefer an attacking defence. I read that we offered both of them the job and Benevides turned us down. I'm not sure what Hall is making compared to the other DC's in the league, but his experience would suggest he's going to get more than average. Hall's hiring doesn't relieve O'Shea from the responsibility of Etch's hiring and O'Shea had 2 good candidates to choose from. BTW: 2014 - Etch - Avg Yards per game against = 338.6 = 8th in the league, 2015 - Hall - Avg Yards Per game against = 394.2 = 8th in the league. MB got us the 9th ranked offense in 2014 in Net Yards and Avg Net offence. That's actually worse than Etch's 8th ranked defence in yards against and net yards per game against. Bringing him back in the name of consistency seems to have worked, because we were still last in Avg Yard Per Game this year. The only time you want consistency is when you're above average to good, not when you're the last in the league. I would much rather have seen Willy learn a new offense where he didn't take so many hits then trotted back out to get creamed over and over in the MB offence. The fault of this team for years hasn't been a lack of consistency. It's been a lot of bad hires. We constantly go for the rookies and cross our fingers that they will become the next good to great CEO, GM or HC. When they fail, we end up having to pay them out and start over again. When we do pay for experience, we choose candidates with a history of failure with mostly bad teams instead of 'overpaying' for guys with good experience on winning teams. This year's coaches of the year candidates show what we should be doing. Both have been coaching since the mid-90's. Both have coached at a high level with good teams who find ways to win. Both have found ways to make their teams highly competitive.

O'Shea's never been a DC so it would be unrealistic for them to expect he'd be able to fix Etch's D by mid-season.

I like experience, but it would have been better to go with an unknown than to hire Etch. A lot of fans knew Etch was a bad choice from the get go because his history pretty much guaranteed failure. I expect the HC to be smarter than most fans so Etch should never have been hired in the first place. Etches defence was clearly a disaster, but O'Shea still got up in front of the mike almost daily and supported him. He even kept Etch on for a while in the off season and tried to get him to change his defence, so they did waste time even after the season before they got rid of him. I wonder if Hall and Benevides hadn't been available if Etch would have been fired at all last year.

O'Shea didn't just make a mistake with MB. He made a mistake hiring MB, Tracey and Etch. He made a mistake when he only replaced Etch last offseason. Folks around here want to give O'Shea a pat on the back for hiring Hall but no responsibility for hiring Etch in the first place. BTW: If Hall wanted to stay as a CFL DC, he had no other choice but Winnipeg, so I'm not sure you can call it a great O'Shea hire as much as a good DC was available who had no other choices. They also want to give him an attaboy for firing Tracey mid-season without holding him responsible for either hiring Tracey in the first place or keeping him on after last year. Now they want to say that MB is 'THE' problem on the team and that O'Shea shouldn't bear any responsibility for hiring him or keeping him for 2 years. For me, it's a pattern of O'Shea not realizing that he's made a mistake followed by not admitting his mistakes followed by finally having to get rid of the mistakes.

Again... not one single person said that... 7-11 or 8-10 is close to .500... 9-9 is exactly .500 ...10-8 or better is over .500... I think that's universally accepted terminology... So you're saying if the team goes 11-7 next year... gets 2nd in the west... maybe makes it to the west finals... that's not good enough for you? The post right before mine said 7-11 was the magic number this year, so yes at least one person said it and there are many more who would just be happy to make the playoffs not matter what after the last few years of futility. Close to .500 means close to .500. It doesn't mean under .500. If I meant under .500 that's what I would have typed. 11-7 would have got us 3rd in the west and 4th overall. Yup... that would have been good enough for me. It's certainly better than the 5 wins which made us the 8th best team. I doubt we win an additional 6 games next year or 120% better than this year, but sure... I'd be happy with it next year. gncXX... This isn't moving the goalposts and I'd be ecstatic if we went 18-0 next year and won the cup. Actually .. it does .. close is just reference to the proximity two objects / points have to one another and ... Oh why bother. Close to can be over or under. Why bother indeed?

Ottawa Redblacks coach Rick Campbell and Edmonton Eskimos coach Chris Jones are the nominees for the 2015 Annis Stukus Trophy, awarded to the CFL coach of the year... http://www.tsn.ca/campbell-jones-cfl-coach-of-year-finalists-1.392555 Might as well add them to the Award Finalist group.