HardCoreBlue

As long as it focuses on that and nothing more. e.g., a media person asking how come they called so many holding calls etc etc etc.

Having a lower percentage doesn't necessarily mean your team lacks in overall draft success. As one of your findings show, some of these players who pan out ended up playing for other teams/leagues (or other reasons of not playing with your team that had nothing to do with talent) which can be a separate issue other than pure draft ability/success. My educated guess would tell me BC would be a good example of this, no? Or is my line of thinking flawed which has happened before and will happen again

Because he is still a damned good player and lots of teams need a centre who can do the things he does in the regular season. Not everyone is as deep as San Jose that they have centres playing on the wing just to fit everyone in. Big man, soft hands. I believe he led the league in helpers this year. What team wouldn't consider him for a fair price?

Regular bus fare covers about 50% of the cost of Transit, with the province and city subsidizing the rest. So you're looking at about $11 round trip each to cover the cost of the charters. Chancellor Matheson and University Crescent. The lighting is incredibly poor, sidewalks non existant, or end abruptly on University Crescent (actually saw an older man injure his leg quite severely on the west sidewalk of University Crescent last summer after a Bomber game right where the sidewalk ends and there's a big rise), mix of drunk and sober pedestrians, people riding bikes through crowds of hundreds and thousands of people (and who knows what their sobriety situation is), confused bus drivers and people trying to find their bus to get out of there in the pitch black dark, then add in people being shooed out of parking lots trying to contend with the pedestrians and bikes. The conditions are definitely there for serious injury or death. But hey, at least they built the railings in the stadium well enough so we can't fall over or under them. Add in a 'home team loss' provides more fuel to this fire unfortunately . . .

Yes, I do recall that particular kicker and his interview. I was wondering what did become of that workout and since they were pursuing other American kickers, I had assumed nothing became of it. I believe he only does placekicking..but I could be wrong. Either way, it's good we got the right Maher involved with the Bombers…not some rabble rouser. At least his last name isn't 'Crapigna' who is profiled on the CFL official website. Don't know the guy, nothing against him, but what an unfortunate last name for a professional athlete, especially a kicker. It just writes itself when what to say when he's approaching the ball. Sorry, carry on.

I completely 100% agree with you, wins this season is not the biggest issue for this club. The biggest uncertainities we have is do we have the luxury, the discipline, the appropriate people that understand this and consistently follow-through in what it means to 'stay the course' for progression other than wins? The true litmus test of this new regime will be how disciplined, how focused, how flexible, how open, how intelligent the coaching staff, the management group and executives are when it comes to minimizing bad decisions influenced by pressures/needs/opinions not relevant, not plausible, not correct in what it will take to turn this organization around towards stability. I'm stating the obvious, yes but overall, collectively with all the non-playing people employed by the WBB over the last while, we haven't done well with this aspect of a shared vision, of shared responsibility and shared accountability. I'm encouraged by what I'm seeing thus far with O'Shea, Walters and Miller. The true test however will be when significant adversities hit this season and how it's handled. Right now, the new people charged with turning this club around are still enjoying the honeymoon phase.

After one of our DB's step in front of him declaring pick six :-). The jury is out on whether this will be good for the type of image the CFL is wanting.

Especially the ones who nod there head up and down when he asks does every get it but in fact they don't get it and poof, it's deleted off the smartboard screen. It reminds me of sitting in math class and my teacher asking if there is any questions as he's erasing everything off the chalkboard saying how easy this stuff is. My mark that term, 33%.

We are a league noted for second and third chances . . .

Why you don't want Glenn here? I'll field that one. Fit for what we need other than pure skill. I'm not sold on the fact that Glenn would embrace a teaching role, 'I'll do what ever this organization wants me to do' mentality. He's already demonstrated that he wants to be the number 1 guy. Nothing wrong with that, just not here. He needs to be flexible. We need him to be a leader whether he plays or not. We need to revitalize the culture of wanting to be a Blue Bomber and I don't think Glenn would want any part of that. He's an athlete with great skills but not a leader in the truest sense. He's never demonstrated to me he can be a leader when it counts the most. He actually reminds me a bit like Cleo Lemon but with a lot more skill. My guess he's never professed to being one and takes care of number one. Fair enough, nothing against him personally but take your wares elsewhere. Just my perspective.

Joey Elliott reminds me of Drew Tate but with less talent.

My guess is no position is safe. O'Shea has the advantage of coming in clean slate. Prove to me you deserve to be here mentality. This is where we start to improve the culture of wanting to be, being proud to be, a Winnipeg Blue Bomber. If that's not part of your mix, then you're not the right fit here.

Holding for sure, why not review whether a receiver was offside in his waggle too? Where does it end? Are we going to give coaches 20 challenge flags per game because there are a lot of calls get missed or are questionable in the course of a game. Hell why even have referees on the field? After every play let someone in Toronto watch a replay and call a penalty if there is one and review everything. Just say no to reviews. Go back to letting the onfield officials do it all and if they're wrong they're wrong. It will balance itself out over the course of a season. I'm agree with this train of thought. The slippery slope effect may present itself where eventually we take out the real time human element from the game. Some may call that traditional type thinking, not keeping up with the times of available technology. I call it boring where the game will have ultimately have no flow to it.

Out of all the CFL teams, from a PR and optic point a view, there is no way Ottawa shows any interest in him if their serious about building credibility and reputation among their fan base.

Gotcha, thanks.

Laurent Duvernay-Tardif has NFL aspiration and is doing his own pro day. Not Lavertu. Looks like Ottawa will now take Lavertu with the Bombers likely (in my opinion) taking Goossen. Lawless said Walters told him his top 3 picks are Duvernay-Tardif, Lavertu, and OL David Foucault. So in all likelihood it will be one of those 3. Laurent Duvernay-Tardif - NFL interest and NFL opportunity. Skipping the CFL Combine. If no NFL offer appears likely returns to McGill for a 5th season. Pierre Lavertu - likely returns to Laval for another season David Foucault - currently making his rounds through the NFL Regional Combines. Other OL options: Mattias Goosen - can play C or G at the CFL level. Can't return to school so he's available for rookie camp in May. Aaron Picton - experience playing RT but likely a RG in the CFL Adam Hughes - to take him second overall is a big reach but could be a consideration later as a 6'5" LG that could play the right side too. Is that in his best interests? Is it simply because he has no aspirations to play in the CFL and doesn't want to risk injury?

Yes, it's called depth and some teams are better at building it, sustaining it than others. We've stunk lately at this aspect and blame can probably be equally distributed among management, coaching, scouting and executives. Hopefully the new regime is better at it.

Agreed. I'd like him to come here and start, if only to help teach Willy for the first year. But if we don't get him, I don't think it will be a big deal. Although, if we did get him, and put him as our QB2, we'd have a seriously good backup to Willy. Any of the above options are good to me. As long as we have a clear cut QB1 and QB2 and not flip flop between 2. I'd like to know exactly what it is that you think Glenn will teach Willy.... Considering he's been in the league for almost 14 years and a fairly successful QB for about 8-9 of those years...I'd say a lot. and specifically that is? More than Khari taught him in Sask? Are you that ridiculous that you're asking me such a stupid question? You want me to tell you what specifically one QB is going to teach another one? He's going to teach him how to dance that's what he's going to do. Seriously, he'd teach him what he knows, that's what he'd teach him. Just like any other QB. If you think Glenn has nothing to teach anyone, you're out to lunch. A good player can always learn something from someone else, whether it be to run, dodge incoming hits, throw, read defenses, etc... Plus, you're picking one small part of what I said above. Well you were the one who said Glenn can teach him...I just asked you what specifically! You are using it as one of the arguments for getting Glenn..I disagree...You're the one with you're panties in a knot! Obvious you don't have the answers! I don't think the issue is what he can teach, the assumption I have is he has a wealth of knowledge on how to be a successful QB in this league. The issue I'm uncertain about is his level of ability to teach, to mentor, to coach others not to mention if he has any desire to.

then he's going to have to sign with the Halifax Schooners if he wants a starting job. Everywhere else is full up. I should probably know this living close to Edmonton, but I'm not sure if Chris Jones has annointed Reilly as their #1 QB . . .

My concern isn't his playing ability or creating possible QB controversies. My concern is his ability to lead a team and his desire to mentor young QB's. I'm not sure what he brings to the table both on and off the field fits well what the type of culture Miller and company are trying to build over time. Signing him may delay that process for possible short term gains.

"I wouldn't change anything I played the game the way that I felt this game should be played . . .' Therein lies the achilles heel of Buck Pierce. It's not a necessarily a criticism because maybe he just didn't know deep down how to play anyway else. But the fact is, because he was unable to modify his game or reinvent himself in some capacity, we will never know how much more he could have achieved in this league. If he moves into coaching, he will need to learn how to modify his approach in efforts to improve.

A lot of things one wants in a QB. Sort of the 'lived and died by the sword' type player. We need a QB that gives our team a true identity and I think what Buck brought to the table can help with that in how we groom our next QB. I think he'd be great for this league what ever that may be.

Answers my long standing off season question about Goltz. Is he done, or does he get picked up by another cfl team?

I'm not understanding your argument about players being easily replaced. Are you saying it's a easy process to regularly turnover players who have the talent fitted to play in the cfl? Sure there may be a few positions compared to others e.g kickers versus qb that have less difficulty in achieving that plug in and play option but overall it doesn't seem that easy. My guess is if you asked any former or existing gm about this, they would be in a better position to explain the complexity and challenges of finding and maintaining a roster of talented players who can successfully play in this unique league.

I'm always intrigued when this term is used in effort to support a 'black and white' argument and to denounce the 'misguided' others who may think otherwise. If you think that this issue is only about public safety and is a fairly easy decision in what to do then you're disagreeing with many professionals in many disciplines, not just mental health professionals. That's a fact. You can have your opinion but sometimes there's no way around the facts and no way around avoiding the complexities of situations like this whether you like it or not. And, not to mention the fact, if people read all the posts here thus far on this issue, it isn't just about public safety, posters are also sharing their opinions on mental illness, mental health. Therefore, that will open up the discussion further than public safety.