TBURGESS

Calgary and Regina both have a game in hand so it would be Cal, SSK, Wpg.

It's not about entitlement or having to be told what to think. There's a difference between not giving up information that may be useful to other teams and directly lying to the Media. MOS directly, unabashidly, and confidently lies. Kinda Trump like.

Never understood why anyone believes anything MOS says to the media. Dude lies to them all the time.

Maybe Bridge was one of the 'vet' QB's. On FB, someone wondered if this means that Streveler is hurt.

Collaros isn't any better this year than those guys and we'll start Streveler in the playoffs anyway, unless he's hurt.

What's the over/under of Collaros lasting a full game? 6 plays? 7? More or less? Yup... I hate this trade, not for what we gave up, but for what we got in return. I'd rather have Franklin, Jennings, even Bridge as the backup to Streveler and yes I know none of them are any good, but they can all last a game or two if needed.

The old 'you can't fire a guy unless you know who his replacement is and that replacement will guaranteed to be better. As there are no guarantees, we should keep the current guy' argument. First things first. Is MOS the guy we want to run the team for the next 3 years? Will he bring back his current OC and DC? Will he bring back Nichols and/or Streveler? Will he change anything if he gets 3 more years? Second thing: No one knows who might be as good or better. How many, without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, thought that Dickenson in Regina or Khari in Montreal were going to have the level of success that they've had? There were no guarantees that Steinauer was going to be good either. Lots of folks thought Claybrooks was going to be the next big thing at HC.

Sometimes the guy that takes a team from horrible to respectable isn't the guy that can take the team to the next level.

It's not one or the other. It's both.

Put me on record as saying I don't want Collaros. I'd prefer Franklin if Toronto's dealing a QB.

The biggest flaw is the defence. Two weeks ago the offence, with Streveler, did more than enough to get the win. The defence lost that game. Last week both the offence and the defence lost the game. Note that doesn't mean that defence has been the problem all year, just 3 of the last 4 games. Unless PLAP calls deep shots, Streveler won't show if he can or can't make the throws. I'd like to see the first play of the game this week be a deep throw to loosen up the Riders D. Make it or not, the DB's will have to respect it. More likely though, it will be a run or dump to Harris.

BS. I don't hate or criticize all things Bombers. For example, I've been pumping Streveler as the starting QB for about a year now and I'm firmly on his side now he has the reins. Being met with skepticism isn't the same thing as others being right. Fans dismiss most things that get in the way of a Bomber love fest.

Like I said. You're not behind the closed doors, so you opinion of what goes on there is useless. You're just projecting what you'd like to think that MOS is saying behind closed doors then saying everyone who doesn't agree with your take is wrong. Kinda your MO.

If you don't think Montreal has turned it around this year, you're not watching them play. They beat us and the Stamps for example. They'd be in the cross over spot with a game in hand, if they were in the west. Would have beaten BC and got their playoff spot locked down last week with their backup QB, if Pipkin didn't fumble a snap. I don't want Hall or PLAP as our next HC. I don't actually want either of them around next year. I think MOS brings both of them back unless PLAP gets a head coach spot. I wasn't suggesting that we hire either of them as HC's, and I'm sure you know it. On QB's... I bet that MOS brings Nichols back as our starter, even if that means losing Streveler. I'm not even arguing that MOS should be fired yet. That's an argument for the off season. We could still win the West and win the cup this year. If that happens, MOS can write his own contract and get the key to the city. I'm arguing that firing MOS doesn't equal a bad team going forward and we don't have to find his replacement before we decide to fire him.

Because you're pretending you know what he is saying behind closed doors. (I can't believe I had to type that.... thought it was obvious)

I think we can all agree that MOS lies to reporters. My stance? I don't know what goes on behind closed doors and I don't pretend that I do.

This isn't about selling houses, but cuz you asked. Sure, sometimes folks find out they can't afford what they want or that their current house isn't going to net them what they want and decide not to sell. That doesn't change the fact that they no longer want to be in their current house. There is a point in firing someone or not giving that person 3 more years who is just 'doing pretty well'. The point being that 'doing pretty well' shouldn't be good enough any more. It was when we first hired MOS because pretty well was better than stinking out the joint. Maybe you're OK with mediocrity or are scared to try something new when we have a top 4 team. That's fine as long as you don't complain about the results we get. The idea that the only thing that can happen if we fire MOS is getting worse is flawed. Folks who want consistency bring up stupid hires like Burke or Kelly and ignore that we could also make a good hire... A guy who takes us to the next level. Folks want to talk about specifics right now to get the conversation off of MOS's post season failure and on to 'that guy wouldn't be any better' because there is no proof that anyone would be better or worse. There is also no proof that keeping MOS will lead to better results. Khari was given Montreal's HC job late and has turned the team around in a single year. Dickenson, another late HC 'choice' has the Riders tied for 1st place. Neither of them were top choices for HC's. Just right place at the right time. Both are examples of change being good for their respective teams and the Riders are a good example of a good team not getting worse by hiring a new HC. Rick Campbell in Ottawa is an example of consistency not always equalling good results.

No, Collaros isn't awesome, but he's way better than Bridge. Yes, I'd hate him if he was a Bomber, mostly because he can't stay healthy.

That's your 'evidence' that MOS is a hard ass behind the scenes? LOL

For the same reason that some people think that MOS is different behind closed doors without being there themselves. Neither side KNOWS, but both sides BELIEVE they do.

You sure he'd have won if the Riders didn't lose their starting QB the week before and had to use Brandon Bridge? Anyway, we aren't playing that team this week. We're playing a team that's got it's starting QB and is much better at home than they are on the road. That's a horrible comparison that has nothing to do with our coaching situation. Most people sell their houses before they buy a new one because they want/need to get rid of the old one before they can move forward. Very few people decide to sell only after they've found a new home. They don't even start looking until they've decided it's time to move in the first place. The first question is do we want to keep MOS or move on? If the answer is move on, then you don't re-sign him and you start looking for his replacement. MOS will want a 3 year contract. If we don't win a playoff game this year, do you want MOS for 3 more years? The management SMS means we won't be able to replace him once we've signed him. There are no guarantees that whoever we replace MOS with will be better than him or worse or about the same. The only guarantee is that he will be different.

I remember their walk off FG the week before in their barn, which is where we're playing this week.

Consistency has got us 1 playoff win in 5 years. Canning MOS, and I'm not saying we should or shouldn't, doesn't mean going back to horrible teams. A different HC might be what we need to get this team over the hump in the playoffs. Not knowing who the new HC would be is no reason to keep the current HC.

The play call wasn't the problem. If Pipkin just gets the ball and falls forward, they get the first down and the win. The problem was the exchange of the snap, which should have been automatic.

I actually didn't mind the call. They only needed 1 yard for a first down, 2 for a TD. They'd been running the ball down BC's throat all game long. If they score the FG, they give the ball back to BC with a minute left to score a FG and they know something about coming back in the last minute of games. The execution of the play was horrible though.