17to85

Upgrade, get bigger, meaner, tougher & more physical. Not only make for a better pass rush but a better run stopping D. It'll never happen under Etch so he has to go. Sunday. You're twisting everything to fit your narrative of firing Etch. Bigger, smaller, tougher, meaner I don't give a **** about any of that, I just want better players. Vega was terrible this year for whatever reason, Peach was himself, which is a plugger, Anderson was good but got hurt, Turner was pretty decent... we need better ends at the very least and that will make the D better. Etch or no Etch this defensive line wasn't good enough to have a good defense. So, thinking a bigger & more physical DL isn't part of improvement? Why do you think we can't stop the run or don't get a pass rush? We're too small. We get pushed back 5 yards when teams run so the second level makes more tackles then our DL does. We get stood straight up when we pass rush as we have no push. We rely on our undersized linebackers to make our plays on the run & the pass & we got killed doing that all season. Don't you think coaching philosophy just as much as personnel has something to do with this? We all knew this would happen going into this season. you say it's because we're too small beause of Etchevary, I say it's because they're flat out not good enough and Walters needs to get better players in here for next year.

Upgrade, get bigger, meaner, tougher & more physical. Not only make for a better pass rush but a better run stopping D. It'll never happen under Etch so he has to go. Sunday. You're twisting everything to fit your narrative of firing Etch. Bigger, smaller, tougher, meaner I don't give a **** about any of that, I just want better players. Vega was terrible this year for whatever reason, Peach was himself, which is a plugger, Anderson was good but got hurt, Turner was pretty decent... we need better ends at the very least and that will make the D better. Etch or no Etch this defensive line wasn't good enough to have a good defense.

Agreed. Peach can stay but he should be playing a much smaller role than he did this year. If Peach is the first guy off the bench as depth I got no problems with that, as an every day starter though? No dice. You can do much better.

I don't mind if someone who actually knows sports talks ****, but when it's just douchebags with no knowledge jumping on that bandwagon I despise it.

A win in 2001, 2007 or 2011 would have done great things for the team because it would have cleared a lot of the angst away from some people and there wouldn't be that pressure heaped on the team because of it. In your words that's bullshit. So we should be happy because we night have won three times in 24 years? We did lose a cup to a lesser team but guess what? We played in the game. I just can't get my head around the position of some who feel not having been in the cup for 24 years is no big deal. So why do we play the game? and I said that where? I said a win in one of those games would have relieved a lot of angst and there would be less pressure on the organization because it wouldn't have been 24 years since the last championship! That's all. Stop trying to read more into a comment than is there. Honestly, some people... I appears you might have a problem reading? I know what you said and what I wrote was whether we should be happy with that followed by a ""?"" That hardly meant I was reading anything else in you opinion. Than after stating a fact about loosing to Calgary I then posted an opinion about what I feel is a strange reaction of some to the last 24 years. Your obligation in this case would have been either ignore the post or to answer the question instead of assuming it was an attack on your statement. I'm sure you know what a ? stands for, right? You might be just too hung up on one thing. Did you ever think of going to diner, going to the theater, volunteering, visiting friends on a football night or going on a trip to where the Bombers don't even exist during the season? All that can be a whole lot of fun. You would find out being a fan should not become an obsession. With PVR you would not miss a thing and if you did so what? you could still make up facts. The big point is that winning a cup when they had the opportunities would have saved the team from a lot of the bad decisions they made. Particularly in 2007. Win a cup there and Berry and Glenn have more rope and we avoid the whole Mike Kelly debacle and everything that came after it.

remember when people here flipped their **** cause Maher was cut?

If you have some DL who can get pressure without needing to send 3 or 4 extra blitzers your team is better off. With Anderson injured and Vega playing hurt all year and having a crappy season and Peach being not so great to start with it really put this defense in a bad spot. It is critical that they upgrade the defensive line or it won't matter who is calling the defense.

Even worse was one of the ******* on CJAY, one of those "rah rah local sports team!" types who doesn't know a thing about sports was talking about the stamps before the last game against the Bombers and how the stamps were on the bye but they have the Bombers next week so it's basically 2 weeks off. Too many egos in that city. They act like the Flames aren't a joke of a team too.

A win in 2001, 2007 or 2011 would have done great things for the team because it would have cleared a lot of the angst away from some people and there wouldn't be that pressure heaped on the team because of it. In your words that's bullshit. So we should be happy because we night have won three times in 24 years? We did lose a cup to a lesser team but guess what? We played in the game. I just can't get my head around the position of some who feel not having been in the cup for 24 years is no big deal. So why do we play the game? and I said that where? I said a win in one of those games would have relieved a lot of angst and there would be less pressure on the organization because it wouldn't have been 24 years since the last championship! That's all. Stop trying to read more into a comment than is there. Honestly, some people...

I like what you're saying overall in this post, I really do. But remarkably coming from a person like me who coaches Atom football players where 100% effort and focus is everything, this statement imho is blinding some Bomber decision-makers from corrececly evaluating players and making some tough decisions. The tough reality being that regardless of 100% effort every play every down and being a loyal team member to a fault is unfortunately not good enough to guarantee a roster spot/starting position. We aren't in Atom, Peewee or Bantam anymore. When I really think about it, that's how Wade Miller was able to be a Bomber for so long . He was simply not talented enough to warrant taking up a roster spot but boy was he loyal, focussed and a hard worker. Probably why he got into private business. Now that he's leading this organization with a head coach who seems to be molded quite similarly, this color blindedness of seeing effort/loyalty as the end all be all of who deserves to be a Bomber concerns me. Bullshit. Wade Miller may not have been the most talented guy but there was a time when he was one of the teams best special teams players and he clearly had the talent to be a CFLer. Thanks for your opinion, but to use your well used quote on other people, your opinion is not based on fact. Wade Miller was not a very good football player, that's a fact. He was also the same guy who came out and said he would quit the team if a very bad coach was fired which would suggest not the best judgement of talent as well. Do love his loyalty and commitment though, misguided at times. It's based on a hell of a lot more facts than your erroneous claims that he wasn't a very good football player. Guys who aren't good football players simply don't have the kind of careers that Miller had. What facts are you willing to bring to this argument other than "I watched him good and he sucked!!!11!"? "Herp derp he kept going offside!11!!!! rabble rabble" can you work in a fat joke somewhere?

I like what you're saying overall in this post, I really do. But remarkably coming from a person like me who coaches Atom football players where 100% effort and focus is everything, this statement imho is blinding some Bomber decision-makers from corrececly evaluating players and making some tough decisions. The tough reality being that regardless of 100% effort every play every down and being a loyal team member to a fault is unfortunately not good enough to guarantee a roster spot/starting position. We aren't in Atom, Peewee or Bantam anymore. When I really think about it, that's how Wade Miller was able to be a Bomber for so long . He was simply not talented enough to warrant taking up a roster spot but boy was he loyal, focussed and a hard worker. Probably why he got into private business. Now that he's leading this organization with a head coach who seems to be molded quite similarly, this color blindedness of seeing effort/loyalty as the end all be all of who deserves to be a Bomber concerns me. Bullshit. Wade Miller may not have been the most talented guy but there was a time when he was one of the teams best special teams players and he clearly had the talent to be a CFLer. Thanks for your opinion, but to use your well used quote on other people, your opinion is not based on fact. Wade Miller was not a very good football player, that's a fact. He was also the same guy who came out and said he would quit the team if a very bad coach was fired which would suggest not the best judgement of talent as well. Do love his loyalty and commitment though, misguided at times. It's based on a hell of a lot more facts than your erroneous claims that he wasn't a very good football player. Guys who aren't good football players simply don't have the kind of careers that Miller had. What facts are you willing to bring to this argument other than "I watched him good and he sucked!!!11!"?

There is still a large difference between what organizations do internally and say externally to the media. Words are cheap, and in this day and age organizations keep things closer to their vest. I'd be willing to bet that O'Shea, Walters, and Miller aren't at all happy with the way this season has turned out, and are already planning on how to start addressing these things going forward. There are multiple reasons not to to divulge these things in the media, some of them including tipping your hate to the 8 other teams in the league as well as leaving your options open as your plan changes and evolves as you evaluate going forward. Actions will always speak louder then words. And we really won't know what the leaders of this organization think or where they see problems until training camp next year when we see who they kept, who they released, and where they brought in talent. Whatever is said now is really just lip service, whatever is said. Given what we know about O'Shea from his time as a player does anyone here actually think that he's not the most pissed off guy out there about how the season ended? That dude was super competitive and I guarantee he is not happy with the way the season ended.

I don't think it's a problem with MOS being unable to see who the better players are, I think he knows damned well who the better players are, I think the problem he had was an unwillingness to make changes to the roster if someone was playing OK. A big part of being successful is knowing when to make a move and when you should replace someone who isn't doing anything wrong because the guy behind him is better. 5-1 to start and then a bunch of close losses made it seem that things were close so they kept hoping the mistakes on the field would be taken care of and the wins would come. We saw though after some blow out losses that he changed up the roster, that tells me that a lesson was learned.

A win in 2001, 2007 or 2011 would have done great things for the team because it would have cleared a lot of the angst away from some people and there wouldn't be that pressure heaped on the team because of it.

I really think what it comes down to is that a lot of fans want to see the coaches and players as angry as they themselves are after losses.

common sense says that if you can get pressure sacks will follow. I don't think you'd see too many people who get a sack every time they get pressure, but if you can consistently generate pressure you will consistently be getting sacks. We can look at the Bombers this season, early in the year they were better at getting pressure on the qb and their sack numbers were in the top part of the league sack race, but that ability to generate pressure lessened as the year went on and now the team is near the bottom of the sack race. One leads to the other.

People still don't get that O'Shea doesn't talk about this stuff in the media? You think he really doesn't know where mistakes were made? Is that more believable than he's just refusing to tell the media anything? Come on now, it's been his MO all season long.

you got the winning lotto numbers in that crystal ball of yours too?

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them. Not necessarily when it comes to passing yards, as I've already shown. No you took a limited sample size and drew conclusions that fit your line of thinking. One season is hardly a representative sample especially when this season has been as odd as it has with wins and losses for everyone. It's nothing to do with the number of tds thrown vs. ints, it simply comes down to turnovers and teams that don't take care of the football lose. You'd be further ahead simply saying ints are a better measure of a qb. You look at big picture sample sizes and you'll see that better stats = more wins, that's just inarguable because putting up passing yards means your offense is moving the ball and more than likely scoring points. You keep insisting passing yards are over rated, they're not. Not at all, but like any statistic it's just one thing to look at. I don't know why you feel the need to try and put some above the other... oh yeah, you're trying to crap on Drew Willy that's why.

I thought you said enough of the blame game?

I like what you're saying overall in this post, I really do. But remarkably coming from a person like me who coaches Atom football players where 100% effort and focus is everything, this statement imho is blinding some Bomber decision-makers from corrececly evaluating players and making some tough decisions. The tough reality being that regardless of 100% effort every play every down and being a loyal team member to a fault is unfortunately not good enough to guarantee a roster spot/starting position. We aren't in Atom, Peewee or Bantam anymore. When I really think about it, that's how Wade Miller was able to be a Bomber for so long . He was simply not talented enough to warrant taking up a roster spot but boy was he loyal, focussed and a hard worker. Probably why he got into private business. Now that he's leading this organization with a head coach who seems to be molded quite similarly, this color blindedness of seeing effort/loyalty as the end all be all of who deserves to be a Bomber concerns me. Bullshit. Wade Miller may not have been the most talented guy but there was a time when he was one of the teams best special teams players and he clearly had the talent to be a CFLer.

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands? yes. Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes.

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them.

not always. Yards correlate with moving the ball and TOP and all that. As I pointed out, if a team moves into the redzone but opts to run the ball into the endzone then the td-int ratio isn't all that important right? You're just trying to pick and choose what you want to use. Everything needs context. Quite honestly you can assess the qb performance for this team without using any stats. The eye test is still good enough for football. These would be today's standings if teams were placed based on passing yards. West: East: 1. WPG 4,276 1. TOR 4,461 2. BC 4,009 2. HAM 4,422 3. EDM 3,848 3. OTT 3,788 4. CGY 3,660 4. MTL 3,234 5. SSK 3,379 And if they were drafted in accordance with the TD-INT ratio... West: East: 1. CGY +14 1. TOR +13 2. EDM +7 2. HAM +3 3. BC +7 3. MTL 0 4. SSK -1 4. OTT -1 5. WPG -3 To me it seems that the TD-INT ratio paints a much more accurate picture. The only team that is misplaced is Montreal (who have been overachieving this year IMO) That is more to do with the overall turnover amount than td-int ratio of a quarterback. There is a well established trend in the CFL of teams that turn over the ball more lose more. You are trying to assign too much importance in winning and losing to quarterbacks I think. Willys numbers all told pretty accurately describe the Bombers season. Team that can't run so the qb has to pass more, but some mistakes made as a result which have held the team back from winning more games. Guy has played well though despite that. There are a lot of factors contributing to his play. That lack of a running game is one. How do the win/loss records look if you base it on total offensive yards? Some teams do rely a lot on the running game, thinking Calgary and Saskatchewan in particular.

Hell I'd give the kid the defensive nod too just to send a message.