Around the League: 2018 Season

[TheSource]

7 hours ago, Booch said:

and so it appears to be occurring again..teams are constanlty evolving their line-ups..bringing in new guys at expense of current ones to better their squad...as we stand pat with the same old "we like our guys"...and "he has worked hard in practice"..."we aren't interested in him (Mathews)

This is the reason that I don't think this management group has the stones to get over the hump...blind loyalty and "liking" a guy only goes so far...and I agree with what Leggett said last year...we need a couple grade A assbags on the team who play to win and don't give a flying @##$ what people think on how they do it...we have a more than capable locker room to manage and maintain it...time for coaches and management to stop being a bunch of ******* and be old school football men...infuriates me to no end

Well said. It's this same frustration for this issue and all the related issues of not being very aggressive about improving that makes me rant and causes me to have a pessimistic view of the organization.

But I can't see this status quo lasting indefinitely. There will be a tipping point where the blind loyalty and lack of effort to improve catches up and the team enters another rebuilding cycle.

When that happens there will inevitably be changes, and not only MOS, but then Walters, and ultimately Miller's head will all be on the chopping block unless one or more decide to break the pattern.

[Bubba Zanetti]

7 hours ago, Booch said:

and so it appears to be occurring again..teams are constanlty evolving their line-ups..bringing in new guys at expense of current ones to better their squad...as we stand pat with the same old "we like our guys"...and "he has worked hard in practice"..."we aren't interested in him (Mathews)

This is the reason that I don't think this management group has the stones to get over the hump...blind loyalty and "liking" a guy only goes so far...and I agree with what Leggett said last year...we need a couple grade A assbags on the team who play to win and don't give a flying @##$ what people think on how they do it...we have a more than capable locker room to manage and maintain it...time for coaches and management to stop being a bunch of ******* and be old school football men...infuriates me to no end

Agreed. O'Shea's blind loyalty drives me ****ing nuts. Its like the Hurl fiasco. The guy was a pilon but we just got fed the same "we like where he's at", "he's doing what were asking him to do", "i dont worry about sam hurl" bull**** week after week. Its like the guy would rather sit in the locker room singing kumbaya with a bunch of wonderful guys who are great to their mothers and would lay their jacket across a puddle for a lady, rather then actual football players with talent that may not be buddy-buddy. A lot of the greats are dicks. There are many examples of locker rooms that didnt necessarily all like each-other but won championships.

[DR. CFL]

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

That's a long time ago just going off memory,

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/bombers-to-cut-500-000-in-team-expenses-1.252839

 

I’m not sure that the connotation of being cheap and  “ penny pinching” is a fair description of having to try and reserect a franchise that was on the verge of extinction. Financial responsibility is the reality when there is no private ownership that is there to write a cheque at the end of the season.

[TheSource]

6 minutes ago, DR. CFL said:

I’m not sure that the connotation of being cheap and  “ penny pinching” is a fair description of having to try and reserect a franchise that was on the verge of extinction. Financial responsibility is the reality when there is no private ownership that is there to write a cheque at the end of the season.

 

And if you can't be competitive in a small market that cannot attract private ownership, then perhaps the time has come to move the team to a market that can afford to be competitive.

This is an issue for the league, just like the NHL the league has an interest in policing the franchises to make sure they are viable. Part of being viable means you have to be able to afford an operating budget big enough to compete on even ground with the other teams. Teams that sit in small markets that cannot do this need to be forced out of those markets into bigger markets that can support a team with private ownership.

 

[Jacquie]

 

[SpeedFlex27]

9 hours ago, Booch said:

and so it appears to be occurring again..teams are constanlty evolving their line-ups..bringing in new guys at expense of current ones to better their squad...as we stand pat with the same old "we like our guys"...and "he has worked hard in practice"..."we aren't interested in him (Mathews)

This is the reason that I don't think this management group has the stones to get over the hump...blind loyalty and "liking" a guy only goes so far...and I agree with what Leggett said last year...we need a couple grade A assbags on the team who play to win and don't give a flying @##$ what people think on how they do it...we have a more than capable locker room to manage and maintain it...time for coaches and management to stop being a bunch of ******* and be old school football men...infuriates me to no end

I usually like your takes on the Bombers & agree but I'm on the fence on this one. I hope you're wrong. If you're not then it's MIke O'Shea's job on the line. He'll be gone. 

[Booch]

8 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I usually like your takes on the Bombers & agree but I'm on the fence on this one. I hope you're wrong. If you're not then it's MIke O'Shea's job on the line. He'll be gone. 

Yeah I hope I am wrong as well....but history keeps repeating here and Oshea has shown at times to a fault he sticks with his guys too long before basically having to make a move to save his arse...or quench the raging fires surrounding the team....That's his one fault that bugs me the most....outside of that I like how he runs the team and goes about things...can he evolve as a coach and fix this...hopefully so...is it Walters playing scared as a G.M and not trying to continually upgrade positions...regardless of what cuts have to be made for it...who knows...but they need to tweek their mindset a bit if you ask me

[pigseye]

Lankford in the lineup is the correct choice from a tactical perspective. You have to have the deep threat to back off the linebackers to help open up the run game for Harris. It is the right decision even if it's not a popular one with the fans. I'm sure that if they had a better option to go to then Lankford they would, but they don't, so you have to go with what you got. Maybe once NFL cuts become available they can look at other options but for now, it's the right choice. 

[Booch]

Any player can play that role...you just have to send them down the field...to think Lankford is the only player who can play a deep threat is dumb. Plus that deep route guy has to have the reputation that he may just catch it.

Oshea just loves the fact he is a team guy..been here a while and is fast...lots of guys are fast and can play that same role...there are fast guys running without the ball...and fast guys who stay fast with the ball...and Lankford has serious ball security skills if he tries to stay fast and actually make moves post catch with ball in his hands...and is also brutal as a receiver if he has to deal with contact or contested grabs

[trueBlue83]

Lankford had a near TD in his hands, great throw by Nichols, right on the money... and as Lankford was going down, he took his right hand off the ball to break his fall rather than hang on to it with both hands.... hit the ground, and the ball popped loose at the 1.  If his priority is saving himself a little pain from the fall over securing the ball with both hands and making the catch, he's just not a good receiver.

[blitzmore]

I Think it is BS that they do not try to improve the team. They brought in Bighill, they brought in Andrew Harris, they brought in Chris Streveler and got rid of Dom Davis, they brought in Weston Dressler, They brought  Justin Medlock and convinced him to stay this year, They brought in Nic Demski, they brought in Drew Wolitarsky, they brought in Kienan LaFrance....and it goes on and on.

This is not Walters fault at all, nor Miller. The roster that goes on the field is controlled by O'Shea, and as many have said, and I agree, he is one stubborn dude, as can be said when he put Nichols back on the field at the end of last game, which caused the booing...but he won't admit it...and defends his actions with some lame excuse, about always trying to win. He is loyal to a fault, which is the reason we still have an average defensive coordinator at best.

Having said that...the players respect O'Shea and some of them are here because he is here. I hate watching him get interviewed because he is so damn defensive about everything. Guess it goes with the position he used to play.

 

 

[pigseye]

13 minutes ago, Booch said:

Any player can play that role...you just have to send them down the field...to think Lankford is the only player who can play a deep threat is dumb. Plus that deep route guy has to have the reputation that he may just catch it.

Oshea just loves the fact he is a team guy..been here a while and is fast...lots of guys are fast and can play that same role...there are fast guys running without the ball...and fast guys who stay fast with the ball...and Lankford has serious ball security skills if he tries to stay fast and actually make moves post catch with ball in his hands...and is also brutal as a receiver if he has to deal with contact or contested grabs

I can understand your frustration but Lankford is the best option they have for the role. I'm sure they looked at all the others and came to this conclusion logically. Lankford just had some rust to shake off as it was his first game, I'm sure he will be productive now that he has had a taste of game action again. Defences do have to respect Lankfords speed and deep threat capabilities as he is capable of making the big play.  

[Booch]

Not talking about off-season and in TC with guys brought in....it's the in-season adjustments and players brought in....we fail to do that and pretty much every team that sees a weakness or an area where there is an opportunity to upgrade with a player who is available...the Bombers stand pat and throw out the "we are happy with our roster" schtick...even tho it is apparently very obvious there are some soft spots....and pretty much every other team has brought in guys mid-season..who have made a significant impact....I can't even think of an instant where we did that under these guys...and there have been many guys come back to the league the last few years where the opportunity was there...but we don't aggressively go after it

trust me former team loyalty only goes so far in the CFL and the $$ value goes a long way..Last year take Derrel Walker for example...if we said hey...u will be our main man..we will pay you 10k more than Edmonton will...he would have been here and you dump Denmark and its done

Same as this year..If Zylstra comes free....you offer him what it takes to get him to sign and if it means dumping Dressler...oh well..football business is a ruthless one but it needs to be to be a winner

[pigseye]

8 minutes ago, blitzmore said:

I Think it is BS that they do not try to improve the team. They brought in Bighill, they brought in Andrew Harris, they brought in Chris Streveler and got rid of Dom Davis, they brought in Weston Dressler, They brought  Justin Medlock and convinced him to stay this year, They brought in Nic Demski, they brought in Drew Wolitarsky, they brought in Kienan LaFrance....and it goes on and on.

This is not Walters fault at all, nor Miller. The roster that goes on the field is controlled by O'Shea, and as many have said, and I agree, he is one stubborn dude, as can be said when he put Nichols back on the field at the end of last game, which caused the booing...but he won't admit it...and defends his actions with some lame excuse, about always trying to win. He is loyal to a fault, which is the reason we still have an average defensive coordinator at best.

Having said that...the players respect O'Shea and some of them are here because he is here. I hate watching him get interviewed because he is so damn defensive about everything. Guess it goes with the position he used to play.

 

 

We can second guess every decision a HC makes but at the end of the day he is just doing what he thinks gives them the best chance to win games, you can't fault a coach for that. And who are we to think that we know any different, we aren't around these guys on a daily basis like the coaches are. 

[Booch]

4 minutes ago, pigseye said:

I can understand your frustration but Lankford is the best option they have for the role. I'm sure they looked at all the others and came to this conclusion logically. Lankford just had some rust to shake off as it was his first game, I'm sure he will be productive now that he has had a taste of game action again. Defences do have to respect Lankfords speed and deep threat capabilities as he is capable of making the big play.  

Nope...it's not that...and at this point in season there is no rust to knock off for a player who has practiced all year..thats nonsense. And why is he the best for the role..do tell

Can he consistently catch a ball without using body??..can he box out a defender to position his body to have best chance to catch ball...caan he out muscle a defender on a 50/50?...can he catch a ball in stride and then make people miss or not go down on first contact?...basically the things you want in that role...well any role for that matter

You have to say a confident no to all those questions...but we have a guy in Washington who does all these things....only thing Lankford has on him is tenure and regular season experience and that is where Oshea fails in a coach in his loyalty to that..or his reluctance to roll the dice on a new guy

[pigseye]

3 minutes ago, Booch said:

Nope...it's not that...and at this point in season there is no rust to knock off for a player who has practiced all year..thats nonsense. And why is he the best for the role..do tell

Can he consistently catch a ball without using body??..can he box out a defender to position his body to have best chance to catch ball...caan he out muscle a defender on a 50/50?...can he catch a ball in stride and then make people miss or not go down on first contact?...basically the things you want in that role...well any role for that matter

You have to say a confident no to all those questions...but we have a guy in Washington who does all these things....only thing Lankford has on him is tenure and regular season experience and that is where Oshea fails in a coach in his loyalty to that..or his reluctance to roll the dice on a new guy

Game speed is still a different animal than practice, you know that better than any of us. He's the best option because the coaches have looked at all their options and determined it to be so. When/if better options become available, I have every confidence that they will explore those too but until then, you play the hand you're dealt. Perhaps Walters is exploring more trade opportunities as we speak? They did move Bowman so anything is possible.

I don't anything about Washington, I refer to the coaches to make that call. Maybe Lankford has earned a couple shots at redemption before it's Washingtons time to take a turn, don't know, can't say but we have to have confidence that the coaches know what is best right now. 

[Bigblue204]

Have there been any notes on practice when it comes to who is practicing where? I too would like to see Washington get an opportunity.

[Booch]

3 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Game speed is still a different animal than practice, you know that better than any of us. He's the best option because the coaches have looked at all their options and determined it to be so. When/if better options become available, I have every confidence that they will explore those too but until then, you play the hand you're dealt. Perhaps Walters is exploring more trade opportunities as we speak? They did move Bowman so anything is possible.

I don't anything about Washington, I refer to the coaches to make that call. Maybe Lankford has earned a couple shots at redemption before it's Washingtons time to take a turn, don't know, can't say but we have to have confidence that the coaches know what is best right now. 

Nope...I know game speed is different for sure...but catching is catching ...Bryant Mitchell sure didn't need to knock off any rust last game for EDM..Tompkins in his first game looked very good with no issues...rust is not a factor if you are practicing all year...they are just polished..good receiver whereas Lankford is not..it's a coaching issue and a loyalty thing being here...plain and simple

 

[pigseye]

Nobody is saying that Lankford is the answer, just that the coaches have determined that he is our best option until better options become available. I would be very surprised if that wasn't the case, people's livelihoods are depending on it, so I would think that would be the main reason. 

[Booch]

well then wtf are the guys on PR there for then if Lankford is best option...and a crappy one at that?...I would be hard pressed to think of a team that would pick Lankford up if we dumped him...not even Montreal who just dropped a guy for dropping a sure TD pass in TJ Grahem whom I would take over Lankford in a heartbeat...Even Kavis has the balls to dump a guy for messing up...a guy with significant NFL experience to boot...but we are gonna trot out the same slop over and over

[rebusrankin]

39 minutes ago, pigseye said:

I can understand your frustration but Lankford is the best option they have for the role. I'm sure they looked at all the others and came to this conclusion logically. Lankford just had some rust to shake off as it was his first game, I'm sure he will be productive now that he has had a taste of game action again. Defences do have to respect Lankfords speed and deep threat capabilities as he is capable of making the big play.  

He'll be productive now that he has game action? Look at his resume as a Blue Bomber, hasn't happened yet. But hey, keep hoping.

[JCon]

Just now, rebusrankin said:

He'll be productive now that he has game action? Look at his resume as a Blue Bomber, hasn't happened yet. But hey, keep hoping.

I think you're missing the tongue-in-cheek replies from pigseye. He's saying the coaches think Lankford is best, so he must be. He's also been heavily critical of the coaching staff, so one would surmise that he does not think highly of Lankford either but thinks the coaches do. 

[Floyd]

 I just don't see the logic of slotting him in as our primary SB...  move Thompkins in there and put Lankford as Field WR or something if you absolutely have to

Anyway last game was a whole lot of bad...  we should be debating why Hall started using Bighill as a Hurlbacker again as much as debating Nichols and Lankford

[M.Silverback]

In all pro sports today it’s a really fine line between authoritarian a-hole coach and players coach. You really can’t succeed being too far one way or the other. I think the best balance is an organization where the players feel that the coach has their back (doesn’t call them out publically), but management makes decisions based on constantly upgrading talent, salary cap, admits mistakes, and is ruthless about it. I think we’re getting closer to that (like trading Bowman for a box of tape; waiving super bust Faith).

Our import WR’s is and has been our weakest position talent wise for a long time. I don’t like Lankford, but, don’t you think if they had a clearly better option they’d be in there? I think if Corey Washington were absolutely crushing it in practice he’d be in there. As O'Shea always says, if he gave them the best chance to win ... And if Zylstra gets cut and the money would work, Walters would replace someone on the roster for him in a heartbeat.  

[rebusrankin]

We had Ricky Collins who has had some success in the CFL and RJ Harris who is having a decent season for Ottawa in camps for us and we cut them. Maybe our staff isn't good at evaluating WR?