17to85

You want one of the top receivers in the league to sit on the IR the rest of the year? Why don't we just play 4 Americans at receiver and make the team that much harder to defend rather than stubbornly sticking with 8 Canadian starters for no apparent reason?

This game was all about Willy and how important he is to this team. Guy is just a leader out there. You can tell the team believes in him and when you give him time to throw man oh man he's putting the ball where it needs to be. He was good last year but he's better this year and the development has been a real treat to watch.

But this is what I'm saying, it's rare that you get a case where one guy is obviously the best candidate. Usually you got a couple guys that there's very little to choose between.

Stayed long enough to help a friend. I guess the size of the organization has a lot to do with it. If you know someone in HR at GWL it may not mean much but a small radio station or a football team then it might. I'd like to think if I was hired on merit & experience to be Bombers GM that I'd hire the best HC available who applied & not a football friend. My approach would be to let to know any applicant I may have worked or played with in the past that while it may have some impact on my decision it won't be the primary one. so you narrow your search down to two people that you feel are close, one is a long time friend who you have worked with before and trust, the other is a guy you don't really know... who do you hire? Obviously the person with the history. It is very rare that you get a candidate that is completely head and shoulders above everyone else.

Everyone in every business everywhere preferentially hires people they know. It's never what you know it's who you know. That's how the world works and it's not cronyism.

A series of poor hires and lack of patience. It's just as simple as that. I'd rather have my head in the sand than up my own ass.

Well quite simple really, Elliott was at the time the best qb the Bombers had that was able to play and he should have been playing. Cato is far from proven as a CFL starter though and part of actually being a good CFL starter is being able to adapt once defences adapt to you. Cato is getting his opportunity to prove if he can or can't, Elliott never got that opportunity because he for Burked.

Hey no reason to get all salty because people shredded your flimsy argument and exposed it for the nonsense it was. There are lots of reasons why this team hasn't won a Grey Cup in 25 years, cronyism isn't one of them. Back to the drawing board, come up with some other crack pot theory maybe it will be better received. If you can't handle being wrong internet forums aren't the place to post crappy theories.

Replace Cato with Troy Smith... Let's give it some time before we annoint Cato. Lots of guys have looked good initially but not been able to sustain it. I'll throw Casey Printers in as another guy who had early success and wasn't able to keep it going.

Room on the Harris bandwagon for me too?

That's my point. "Better than Brink" did not equal "good QB", just like "Marve is better than Brohm" does not mean "Marve should be starting because he's so good". Many who want rid of Brohm think that Marve will come in and light it up, but like Elliot he could quite easily stink it up, and the coaches must believe that is the case based on not playing him and explaining how he is deficient in the areas they need him to be stronger in. Elliot's riskiness was not just riverboat gambler mentality, it was a fundamental inability to read the defence and exploit it. That was proven by the lack of success on any other team that took a chance on him afterwards. He was not a good QB, and "better than Brink" was such a low bar that people falsely elevated his ability to play because of it and pinned unrealistic expectations on him. I fear the same scenario with Marve now. My point is that Elliott hardly stunk it up, he moved the ball effectively but threw some ints in the red zone. Rather than working to correct that as a normal coach might do, he got the under the bus treatment cause the coach was pissed off as he often was and he liked to bury players who displeased him. Not buying it. If he was as illustrious as you guys are trying to portray, he would still be on a roster and not cut from two other squads.. One with potentially worse QB depth then us.. Football is a harsh game, opportunities don't come around often and a lot of players have missed there's never to get another one. BC and Ottawa he was never going to get the opportunity. His opportunity was in Winnipeg but a few mistakes and a terrible coach and his window of opportunity slammed shut. No.. No it didn't tho. Here? Yes.. But in BC and in Ottawa he had 2 more opportunities to prove himself.. Those weren't real opportunities though. He went in there behind veteran starters and being as old as he was he was not viewed as a development player. He was a uniform filler in those stops nothing more. His opportunity came in Winnipeg and that's the only real one he got.

That's my point. "Better than Brink" did not equal "good QB", just like "Marve is better than Brohm" does not mean "Marve should be starting because he's so good". Many who want rid of Brohm think that Marve will come in and light it up, but like Elliot he could quite easily stink it up, and the coaches must believe that is the case based on not playing him and explaining how he is deficient in the areas they need him to be stronger in. Elliot's riskiness was not just riverboat gambler mentality, it was a fundamental inability to read the defence and exploit it. That was proven by the lack of success on any other team that took a chance on him afterwards. He was not a good QB, and "better than Brink" was such a low bar that people falsely elevated his ability to play because of it and pinned unrealistic expectations on him. I fear the same scenario with Marve now. My point is that Elliott hardly stunk it up, he moved the ball effectively but threw some ints in the red zone. Rather than working to correct that as a normal coach might do, he got the under the bus treatment cause the coach was pissed off as he often was and he liked to bury players who displeased him. Not buying it. If he was as illustrious as you guys are trying to portray, he would still be on a roster and not cut from two other squads.. One with potentially worse QB depth then us.. Football is a harsh game, opportunities don't come around often and a lot of players have missed there's never to get another one. BC and Ottawa he was never going to get the opportunity. His opportunity was in Winnipeg but a few mistakes and a terrible coach and his window of opportunity slammed shut.

yeah I hate having a proven top receiver in the lineup, better to have rookies catching passes

I wound up with the Sask qbs in fantaseh, I figured well if Durant sucks or gets hurt at least they got Glenn... but both qbs hurt? Well it was a nice run I had for a while there. Might actually catch up to you at this rate seeing as I got Edmonton QBs, haha. Worry about winning one game before you go chasing after the big dogs.

Being the straight man is a thankless job and often gets over looked.

I wound up with the Sask qbs in fantaseh, I figured well if Durant sucks or gets hurt at least they got Glenn... but both qbs hurt? Well it was a nice run I had for a while there.

That's my point. "Better than Brink" did not equal "good QB", just like "Marve is better than Brohm" does not mean "Marve should be starting because he's so good". Many who want rid of Brohm think that Marve will come in and light it up, but like Elliot he could quite easily stink it up, and the coaches must believe that is the case based on not playing him and explaining how he is deficient in the areas they need him to be stronger in. Elliot's riskiness was not just riverboat gambler mentality, it was a fundamental inability to read the defence and exploit it. That was proven by the lack of success on any other team that took a chance on him afterwards. He was not a good QB, and "better than Brink" was such a low bar that people falsely elevated his ability to play because of it and pinned unrealistic expectations on him. I fear the same scenario with Marve now. My point is that Elliott hardly stunk it up, he moved the ball effectively but threw some ints in the red zone. Rather than working to correct that as a normal coach might do, he got the under the bus treatment cause the coach was pissed off as he often was and he liked to bury players who displeased him.

I don't know that the Willy injury against Edm was an "obvious penalty"... but I did point out during the game that Jake Thomas got called for a penalty that was essentially the same type of play... hit the qb low it's supposed to be a flag and he was obviously hit low.

Oh please, Elliott was so much better than Brink it wasn't even funny. Elliotts problem was that he took too many risks in the red zone and rather than working with him to improve that he got tossed under the bus.

Sometimes it's hard to tell when someone is actually trolling or if they're just naturally stupid.

You make room for guys like that. If this team has a serious cap crunch then someone has horribly mismanaged the cap situation because the team isn't nearly talented enough to be spending that big.

He may not be a natural MLB but the guy did the job there last year pretty well. Remember it was the Etch system on D, no matter who was in the middle teams were going to run all over the defence. At least Wild would be in the hole to hit a back as opposed to Hurl who seems to prefer waiting for guys to come to him.

pretty much exactly the bolded. He goes out and has a rough game fans would be no kinder to him than they are to Brohm and we'd run him out of town. It's the way things work in Winnipeg, Overall the fan base treats qbs the same way Mike Kelly did. They're not an instant success despite the adversity they have to face toss em on the scrap heap and keep trying until you find that instant smash hit. Other teams seem to have less trouble finding quality QBs that we do, we traded for Willy so we didn't even find him... Like Montreal who have gone through how many qbs since Calvillo retired? Or Hamilton who had to poach a free agent? Or Ottawa who brought in a FA and got a backup in the expansion draft? Or Toronto who had Harris on their roster for several years now developing and he's still the backup to Ray who yep from another team. Calgary sure we'll give them that, BC them too cause Wally always managed to find a qb, but Edmonton still has NIchols as a backup and they seem to have been trying to get rid of him for a while but no one can beat him, other than that it's Reilly who you guessed it, came from another team. Durant was a good find by the Riders but since then what have they got? Kevin The Journeyman Glenn and a pile of crap, I don't see all this success other teams are having finding qbs, I see a couple guys who can find qbs and everyone else picks up from them.

Except that no one is defending Brohm. Well maybe one guy, most people are simply arguing the point that Marve is superman and will save the day.

getting old is a *****. At this point the best thing Picard brings to the field is punching guys in the nuts or whatever he does to piss people off.