Burke

[blitzmore]

17to85 time to give up on the Mack vs Walters thing...Mack is gone gone gone...Walters is here and doing a damn good job at the moment! No one knows what the future wlll bring, but he is doing his job and all you are trying to do is make it look too simple...it's not!...

[17to85]

 

So here's another thing that should be brought up... I know everyone is loving Walters right now but don't we raise an eyebrow having to use a guy like Ford at rb right now when Garrett would in my mind anyway be a better option for the team as a full time starter? Seems that maybe they were too quick to cut the guy. 

Not really, Garrett didn't show enough in camp after his injury, we have another RB in camp now who looked good with the Vikes, and on film

 

he showed enough to be kept around the team, it's pretty obvious that Crowotn and Burke liked Ford, but perhaps the old GM liked Garrett better and that's why he was kept cause he knew if we needed a rb he was a better choice? Having a new guy brought in hasn't helped the last couple games we've had to play without SImpson. 

[17to85]

17to85 time to give up on the Mack vs Walters thing...Mack is gone gone gone...Walters is here and doing a damn good job at the moment! No one knows what the future wlll bring, but he is doing his job and all you are trying to do is make it look too simple...it's not!...

It's not a Mack vs. Walters thing though, I'm simply saying that Mack takes far far more **** than he should be while Walters is in a honey moon phase where nothing he does is bad.... except that if we look at it objectively maybe it's not really all winners and there's a lot of "meh" in there. 

[blitzmore]

 

 

So here's another thing that should be brought up... I know everyone is loving Walters right now but don't we raise an eyebrow having to use a guy like Ford at rb right now when Garrett would in my mind anyway be a better option for the team as a full time starter? Seems that maybe they were too quick to cut the guy. 

Not really, Garrett didn't show enough in camp after his injury, we have another RB in camp now who looked good with the Vikes, and on film

 

he showed enough to be kept around the team, it's pretty obvious that Crowotn and Burke liked Ford, but perhaps the old GM liked Garrett better and that's why he was kept cause he knew if we needed a rb he was a better choice? Having a new guy brought in hasn't helped the last couple games we've had to play without SImpson. 

 

The new guy has been here a week...so you're point is? Ford was playing, which is a coach's decision.  

[17to85]

The new guy has been here a week...so you're point is? Ford was playing, which is a coach's decision.  

 

 

 

the point is that if they'd kept Garrett he'd have been able to play the past 2 weeks because he's a better option at RB in my opinion than Ford is. This team needs all the RB help it can get to have a chance and Ford just isn't cutting it. 

[blitzmore]

 

The new guy has been here a week...so you're point is? Ford was playing, which is a coach's decision.  

 

 

 

the point is that if they'd kept Garrett he'd have been able to play the past 2 weeks because he's a better option at RB in my opinion than Ford is. This team needs all the RB help it can get to have a chance and Ford just isn't cutting it. 

 

Yup...Ford is really supposed to cut it with a band aid offensive line!

[17to85]

 

 

The new guy has been here a week...so you're point is? Ford was playing, which is a coach's decision.  

 

 

 

the point is that if they'd kept Garrett he'd have been able to play the past 2 weeks because he's a better option at RB in my opinion than Ford is. This team needs all the RB help it can get to have a chance and Ford just isn't cutting it. 

 

Yup...Ford is really supposed to cut it with a band aid offensive line!

 

that sound you may have heard is the point zooming way over your head. Garrett is much more versatile and better at running when there's less blocking. He helps more with a poor o-line than ford does. Better runner in traffic, better hands I think, two things that could immensely help the team in it's current state. Ford is a good chance of pace guy but as an every down back he's limited. 

[blitzmore]

 

 

 

The new guy has been here a week...so you're point is? Ford was playing, which is a coach's decision.  

 

 

 

the point is that if they'd kept Garrett he'd have been able to play the past 2 weeks because he's a better option at RB in my opinion than Ford is. This team needs all the RB help it can get to have a chance and Ford just isn't cutting it. 

 

Yup...Ford is really supposed to cut it with a band aid offensive line!

 

that sound you may have heard is the point zooming way over your head. Garrett is much more versatile and better at running when there's less blocking. He helps more with a poor o-line than ford does. Better runner in traffic, better hands I think, two things that could immensely help the team in it's current state. Ford is a good chance of pace guy but as an every down back he's limited. 

No I saw the point you were feebly attempting to make, but you completely missed the real point, which is that with two guys in camp for less than a week, how would you ever expect to have a back have a really good running game. Garrett had nine rushes for 30 yards yesterday for a 3.3 yard average....Wow! way better than Ford...with an intact offensive line...I guess you just like saying sh.t

[17to85]

well he also had 7 catches for 64 yards.... I'm saying that picking ford over garrett was a mistake, I stand by it simply because Ford is so one dimensional as a player. 

[kelownabomberfan]

Garrett didn't really impress me much yesterday.  He went the wrong way a few times and didn't look like he knew what he was doing.  I also don't think he survived contact with the ground on that TD and TSN didn't seem to have the balls to show the replay from any angle that would have proved it.

[iso_55]

Cant fire him today.  Who replaces him, MB?

 

And then who keeps the D from completely sinking to the bottom of the ocean?

Who the hell cares? Does it matter? Season is a lost cause anyway so can him.

[iso_55]

 

 

So here's another thing that should be brought up... I know everyone is loving Walters right now but don't we raise an eyebrow having to use a guy like Ford at rb right now when Garrett would in my mind anyway be a better option for the team as a full time starter? Seems that maybe they were too quick to cut the guy. 

 

Walters is looking good because Mack was asleep at the wheel...  Walters found import tackles and signed some castoffs - but all GMs (except Mack) do that... I would agree that the jury is still out - i.e. Bo Smith, Levi Brown, etc...

 

However, I do think that Walters ends up as our full-time GM - there is such a tiny window to sign Collaros or anyone before the Ottawa draft... if he gets that done, how do you fire/demote him after that?  

 

If he doesn't get it done, is there really time to get a new GM in place before free agency?  If Higgins or someone is available, they would have to be in here by mid-December at the latest.  

 

Chances are Mack would have brought in the same tackles just because it's the scouting that finds players and we have the same scouts, other than that Kelly is the only guy Walters has brought in that has made an actual impact so far. People are freaking out cause the guy said the right things and brought in a couple bodies, but Mack brought in bodies when he needed them too, just tended to be from a different source. The amount of crap that Mack gets thrown at him is too damned high and because he made such a good scape goat Walters has a pretty easy job. Never mind that the biggest mistake is still there (Burke) and the team still has no life and still regularly gets out coached and continually shows no signs of life. 

 

Man, this is STILL Mack's team. He built this steaming pile of crud we call a football team. How can you keep apologizing for the guy??? Burke is not a good head coach &  Mack hired him. In fairness to Burke, Mack gave him the (lack of) players to work with. I guess zippo talent at most positions is Burke's fault too??? How can you say, "chances are" he'd have brought in the same tackles?? You can't say that with any certainty. The smell coming from the U of M campus is all Joe Mack.

[17to85]

Man, this is STILL Mack's team. He built this steaming pile of crud we call a football team. How can you keep apologizing for the guy??? Burke is not a good head coach &  Mack hired him. In fairness to Burke, Mack gave him the (lack of) players to work with. I guess zippo talent at most positions is Burke's fault too??? How can you say, "chances are" he'd have brought in the same tackles?? You can't say that with any certainty. The smell coming from the U of M campus is all Joe Mack.

I don't buy that it's a pile of crud for players. There's a hell of a lot of talent on the defense there that the coaches are utterly failing to get the most out of week in and week out. We've seen what they can do in week 2 and in the banjo bowl with proper coaching, it's damned impressive, but most weeks they're lost, that's a lack of clear direction from the coaches. I know full well who hired Burke and I've been talking about that being an issue for longer than anyone else, but to simply say the talent isn't there is a fallacy. There's talent there, the coaches aren't getting the most out of it, not even close. I can make a guess that these tackles didn't just pop up out of nowhere simply because the scouting system hasn't changed through it all. It's a pretty safe assumption that these same scouts would have presented these same players to whoever the GM was. Once you put down the haterade you're drinking and look at things objectively you might stop blaming absolutely everyone on this false notion that Joe Mack couldn't and wouldn't bring in any talent worth a damn. 

[Floyd]

 

Man, this is STILL Mack's team. He built this steaming pile of crud we call a football team. How can you keep apologizing for the guy??? Burke is not a good head coach &  Mack hired him. In fairness to Burke, Mack gave him the (lack of) players to work with. I guess zippo talent at most positions is Burke's fault too??? How can you say, "chances are" he'd have brought in the same tackles?? You can't say that with any certainty. The smell coming from the U of M campus is all Joe Mack.

I don't buy that it's a pile of crud for players. There's a hell of a lot of talent on the defense there that the coaches are utterly failing to get the most out of week in and week out. We've seen what they can do in week 2 and in the banjo bowl with proper coaching, it's damned impressive, but most weeks they're lost, that's a lack of clear direction from the coaches. I know full well who hired Burke and I've been talking about that being an issue for longer than anyone else, but to simply say the talent isn't there is a fallacy. There's talent there, the coaches aren't getting the most out of it, not even close. I can make a guess that these tackles didn't just pop up out of nowhere simply because the scouting system hasn't changed through it all. It's a pretty safe assumption that these same scouts would have presented these same players to whoever the GM was. Once you put down the haterade you're drinking and look at things objectively you might stop blaming absolutely everyone on this false notion that Joe Mack couldn't and wouldn't bring in any talent worth a damn. 

 

 

No one is claiming that Mack couldn't bring in talent... the problem is that he just couldn't bring in enough talent or the right talent...

 

Everyone goo-goo'd over Mack find DL and DB prospects - except pretty much every single GM in the league does that as well.

 

Mack was a glorified scout, not even close to a GM - we are paying for it now.  

 

There is talent on the D side of this team, just no depth.  There is not nearly enough talent on the offensive side and no depth.

 

Last year and even moreso this year were the first actual seasons fielding a team primarily recruited by Mack.  It speaks for itself.

[Floyd]

Just read this in the freep...

 

'Burke also said coaches are toying with the idea of starting three American offensive linemen, now that veteran and Texan Glenn January is healthy again. The hope is to energize the Bombers’ lifeless run game, he said, and he would likely balance the roster move by starting another Canadian on defence, such as linebacker Pierre-Luc Labbe.'

 

Ugh.  Cauchy and Labbe on D - didn't we just try that in OT...?

 

What's wrong with Jones-Greaves-Sorenson-Pencer-January...  I mean besides Sorenson, that's a decent lineup.

[Mr Dee]

Garrett didn't really impress me much yesterday.  He went the wrong way a few times and didn't look like he knew what he was doing.  I also don't think he survived contact with the ground on that TD and TSN didn't seem to have the balls to show the replay from any angle that would have proved it.

 

That whole break the plane of the end zone has irked me for years, and that's what they ruled on that play. 

He 'broke the plane' of the end zone and the contact with the ground after that didn't matter.

[Mr Dee]

Just read this in the freep...

 

'Burke also said coaches are toying with the idea of starting three American offensive linemen, now that veteran and Texan Glenn January is healthy again. The hope is to energize the Bombers’ lifeless run game, he said, and he would likely balance the roster move by starting another Canadian on defence, such as linebacker Pierre-Luc Labbe.'

 

Ugh.  Cauchy and Labbe on D - didn't we just try that in OT...?

 

What's wrong with Jones-Greaves-Sorenson-Pencer-January...  I mean besides Sorenson, that's a decent lineup.

 

Yes, I think going with your line-up lessens the likelihood of too many D changes especially when we need to play with JJ at safety. (It had been reported JJ was at safety at practice)

Maybe somebody could confirm that?

[B-F-F-C]

Garrett didn't really impress me much yesterday.  He went the wrong way a few times and didn't look like he knew what he was doing.  I also don't think he survived contact with the ground on that TD and TSN didn't seem to have the balls to show the replay from any angle that would have proved it.

 

On that particular play he doesn't need to.  All he has to do is have possession of the ball as it crosses the goal line. If he caught the ball in the endzone and he didn't survive the impact on a bang-bang play, that's a different story.  

 

It was definitely  TD. 

[DR. CFL]

People should review Mack's last go round with the Club. He the rode the coat tails of Bill Pollian's players. Remember who Pollian's was?

[iso_55]

When it comes to Polian: Can you say Super Bowl? I knew ya could.

[rebusrankin]

3 import OL, the stupidity knows no end.

[kelownabomberfan]

When it comes to Polian: Can you say Super Bowl? I knew ya could.

 

Can you say Scott Norwood? 

[kelownabomberfan]

3 import OL, the stupidity knows no end.

 

Why not just go 5 import OL and play all Canadian receiving corp?

[Blueandgold]

 

3 import OL, the stupidity knows no end.

 

Why not just go 5 import OL and play all Canadian receiving corp?

 

Watson, Foster, Etienne, Kohlert and Poblah wouldn't be THAT bad of a group. I would much rather play Jovon Johnson at safety and go with an all import secondary rather than start three imports on the line.

[do or die]

We do have some young talent....but:

 

It will be interesting to see the (potentially negative) effect on them.....by riding out the rest of the season, with the present staff, particularly Burke....