TBURGESS

If they can't be fired right now to keep all the attention focused on the events surrounding the festivities and the game itself, it would be bad form to interview people for a job that isn't even open yet. To me that sort of looks bush league. If they were going to fire the coordinators they should have done it the way BC did. Fire before the moratorium. That being said... if the decision's been made to fire one or more coordinators and those folks have been told, then there's nothing bush league about doing interviews during GC week. Brice... Steinhauer is a good DC who's on a team that's made it to the GC two years running. Other than a big raise, there's nothing in it for him to leave Hamilton for the same job on the Bombers.

No advantage to waiting until after the GC to fire OC/DC. in fact GC week is a great time to interview potential replacements. The league usually puts a stop to any firings during GC week, so we can't fire them now. I'd like to see us replace both coordinators, but the tea leaves would suggest that we aren't going to.

I'd take Mitchell over Willy every day of the week. Better QB all round.

Goes to show there isn't just one way to be a good to great coach.

I hope the 'Fire Etch' folks of the 'Power Struggle' win. Shouldn't be a power struggle though. Everyone knows the Bosses vote is worth the cumulative votes of everyone underneath them + 1. If Miller or Walters want Etch gone, he'll be gone.

Saw this coming yesterday when it was reported that Braley would pay out coaches who Wally didn't think should be there anymore. I'd take Benevides over Etch in a second, but I'm not sure he'd want to go to Winnipeg.

My take on O Line: T: Daniels - Got more push on the running game and provided good protection in the passing game. Younger and cheaper than January who didn't play well due to age/injuries. I wouldn't bid high for January and I wouldn't worry if another team values him more than we do. G: Greaves - Played pretty well. He's the least of our problems on O line IMHO. CENTER: Goosen. We drafted him to play center and we should move him there next year. I wish we'd started him at center for the last few games to give him some experience. G: Free Agent (Holmes?) or 1st Draft Pick or Neufeld. Lots of questions. No obvious answer. T: Neufeld or new import. I'd like to see 4 NI's, but we don't have the hogs for that yet. Newfeld is our only NI choice IMHO. That leaves Morely, 1st Draft Pick or Neufeld or Everett fighting for the 6th and and the PR O lineman. If Morely isn't the 6th, then see if we can trade him for something useful as he isn't going to get any better. The rest of our O lineman are on the bubble or gonzo IMHO.

I prefer Wally's and Benevides approach to the year end presser than the Walters and O'Shea approach. Note that they didn't 'throw anyone under the bus' but still managed to let folks know where they stand. Marsh was gone most of this season and there wasn't much doubt in my mind that he wouldn't be back. More older players will get cut free in the next few weeks.

Good signing. Hopefully we can get a couple more signed before the end of the year.

Good signing.

I wouldn't pay big FA bucks to imports unless they are game changers. I'd target Holmes and Westerman.

Check out: ‘We have to make tough decisions,’ says B.C. Lions GM Buono of coach Benevides... There were plenty of questions, few concrete answers and now room for speculation as Lions head coach Mike Benevides and GM Wally Buono addressed reporters in the wake of Sunday’s disastrous B.C. Lions playoff loss to the Montreal Alouettes. It was time to “face the music,” said Buono. The future of Benevides and quarterback Travis Lulay, who has dealt with recurring right-shoulder problems in each of the last three seasons, is undecided.....

Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players. So you're being critical of Walters based on one draft then? Because if that's the case your argument is pretty weak, as usual, nevermind that it's incorrect since we drafted an o-lineman with our first pick in this past draft. What's your angle for your argument exactly? Critical of Walters? WTF? How the heck did you get that from what I've typed? Walters didn't go with the best available player or even the best available O lineman. He went with the best available center who was ranked 9th because that's our greatest need. I completely agree with Walters decision. Walters also said he'd draft an O lineman high and another one late in the draft. I agree with that too. Not sure what's so difficult for you to understand sport. You said we haven't been drafting by position, but by best player available (Which I have underlined and bolded for clairity purposes). My point was that we haven't been drafting the best players available (based on the consensus at the time of said drafts) as we selected Etienne and Pencer with some of our first round picks prior to 2014. You can include the Andy Mulumba pick in there as well. In the final rankings in each year Mulumba was ranked fifth, but picked second, Pencer who wasn't even in the final rankings in 2012, nor was he in the January ranking either, but he was picked third, and Jade Etienne who wasn't in the final rankings either, but was picked fourth. Again, your point as quoted was "we've been drafting the best available around these parts" which as I've indicated in my comments above, is completely incorrect on your part based on where they were ranked and when they were selected. You countered by saying those are players Mack thought were the best available. Perhaps, but we'll never know his logic into those selections - but it still goes against your main point because based on the rankings, and what was being said around the league at the time of those picks, the last things those players were was the best player available. Furthermore, you completely contradicted your comment saying "we've been drafting the best available around these parts" in your rebuttal to my post. You said we drafted Goossen who was ranked ninth - Congrats by the way, that's the only correct statement in either post you made that I've quoted. What you also said in that same post was that "He went with the best available centre...". Now forgive me if I'm wrong (and I'm not, so I'll save you the time) but last time I checked, I'm pretty sure centre is one of the 12 positions on the offensive side of the ball. You said in your first quoted statement that we've been drafting by BPA, and not by need at a position, yet you bring up 2014 and say we drafted based on our need at centre. Do you see the contradiction now in your statements since I've essentially spelled it out for you? With those out of the way, I brought up Walters because he's the only GM we've had draft in recent years aside from Mack. I'm not including Kelly/Murphy as that's too far back now considering when they were in charge. I'll restate my comment in my initial post - Given as we've very clearly not been drafting the BPA as I've indicated (yet you said we've been doing), and that we have in fact drafted by need at a position under Walters (which you said that we haven't, but later contradicted yourself in your rebuttal), what angle exactly are you trying to make in your argument? Listen sport. You said I was being critical of Walters, which is completely untrue. I never typed a word about Walters before you made your incorrect and ignorant statement. Mack drafted who he thought was best no matter what anyone else thought. His BPA's. Most of them turned out to be huge mistakes, but that's because Mack wasn't the smartest guy in the room like he thought he was. We didn't draft for need in any of the Mack drafts. It would have been hugely better for us to pick an O lineman at the top and one later on in every draft. By now, we'd have a good to great O line and could change to drafting the BPA. It would have been better to pick the consensus next best player too, but that's not what we did. We drafted the guys Mack thought were best. Period. Full stop. Kelly did the same thing. Chose the BPA as he saw it and it didn't work out. Walters drafted for need last year. It was the first time we've done that in years and about bloody time. I hope he does it again this year and again and again until we have an O line we can count on. This is not a flip flop. I'm simply agreeing with what Walters is doing and it's not drafting the BPA. I'll restate the obvious. We've been drafting the BPA as our GM 's see it for years. It gave us Muamba and pretty much nothing else. Walters and I agree that drafting for need is the better way to go. We'll see how it works out over the next few years.

Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players. So you're being critical of Walters based on one draft then? Because if that's the case your argument is pretty weak, as usual, nevermind that it's incorrect since we drafted an o-lineman with our first pick in this past draft. What's your angle for your argument exactly? Critical of Walters? WTF? How the heck did you get that from what I've typed? Walters didn't go with the best available player or even the best available O lineman. He went with the best available center who was ranked 9th because that's our greatest need. I completely agree with Walters decision. Walters also said he'd draft an O lineman high and another one late in the draft. I agree with that too.

The idea is to fix the O line first, because everything on offense starts at the O line.

None of those stats have anything to do with giving the ball away or lack of offensive production or having the defense on the field for 1:35 more than Calgary. They have to do with the other teams running the ball down our throats and our defense having no way to stop them. We were 2nd best against the pass partly because other teams didn't have to pass to beat us. No one's suggesting that there was only one factor that caused our losses. I'm just saying that the defense's play is part of the reason we lost and lost and lost.... There, you just admitted that's stats are baseless. And that's what I was pointing out. You can hang onto the ball longer by running, but you also can win the game quicker by passing. Stats are like laces that you can loop around and tie your shoes, but they're not necessary with loafers, where at least you can get some pennies. (huh) Stats only tell part of the story. That doesn't mean they are baseless. If you can beat a team by running, then that's what you do and that's what lots of teams did to us. Folks want it to be about fixing 1 thing and the other things don't really matter, but that's not the way football works. Stopping the run matters as does stopping the pass and stopping the big returns and being able to run and being able to pass and keeping your QB healthy and kicking FG's and everything else that goes into a football game. I'm referring to facts are baseless, (bolded) when one only uses them to tell a part of the story…like you did. You only quoted facts on the run..not on anything else. Now you are admitting that they are only part of the story. Then you go on to list everything else that is part of winning and losing football games, just like we've been pointing out, all along.(bolded) Stats are facts. Baseless means without foundation in fact. Therefore stats, by definition, aren't baseless. I never said stats tell the full story. I showed the stats that point out our defense is sub-standard, below average, and quite frankly, not good enough. You pointed out that they were above average against the pass, but that doesn't make the overall defense good enough. Can't rush the passer, stop the run or get themselves off the field = below average overall.

You sure did and I picked BC. Worst pick ever for me.

Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players.

You love to characterize folks who disagree with you as anti-Etch haters. I'm anti-losing and the reality is that Etch is a big part of the Bombers losing so often this year. In your fantasy world, Etch will suddenly become a better DC who suddenly produces an above average defense when he hasn't done it in the past. That's not likely to ever happen.

None of those stats have anything to do with giving the ball away or lack of offensive production or having the defense on the field for 1:35 more than Calgary. They have to do with the other teams running the ball down our throats and our defense having no way to stop them. We were 2nd best against the pass partly because other teams didn't have to pass to beat us. No one's suggesting that there was only one factor that caused our losses. I'm just saying that the defense's play is part of the reason we lost and lost and lost.... There, you just admitted that's stats are baseless. And that's what I was pointing out. You can hang onto the ball longer by running, but you also can win the game quicker by passing. Stats are like laces that you can loop around and tie your shoes, but they're not necessary with loafers, where at least you can get some pennies. (huh) Stats only tell part of the story. That doesn't mean they are baseless. If you can beat a team by running, then that's what you do and that's what lots of teams did to us. Folks want it to be about fixing 1 thing and the other things don't really matter, but that's not the way football works. Stopping the run matters as does stopping the pass and stopping the big returns and being able to run and being able to pass and keeping your QB healthy and kicking FG's and everything else that goes into a football game.

Lies. They stopped teams plenty only to have the offense send them right back on the field. No use in trying to help you see the truth. You've already made your mind up and nothing's going to change it.

None of those stats have anything to do with giving the ball away or lack of offensive production or having the defense on the field for 1:35 more than Calgary. They have to do with the other teams running the ball down our throats and our defense having no way to stop them. We were 2nd best against the pass partly because other teams didn't have to pass to beat us. No one's suggesting that there was only one factor that caused our losses. I'm just saying that the defense's play is part of the reason we lost and lost and lost....

Obviously, you haven't been following the Bombers drafts. We used 1 high draft pick on Pencer (Stupid pick) and 1 on Goosen (TBD) in the last 6 years. and a bunch taken in the later rounds like every team does, what's your damn point? The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players.

The offense wasn't any good, but the defense couldn't get itself off the field either and that was a big problem.

Obviously, you haven't been following the Bombers drafts. We used 1 high draft pick on Pencer (Stupid pick) and 1 on Goosen (TBD) in the last 6 years.