Call it what you want … you need to move on from Collaros

[Mike]

6 hours ago, GCn20 said:

It's an issue. Whether it is a major one is very highly debateable.

Could we have? Explain what makes you think any one of them would have made a lick of a difference. I saw no tiredness in the Jeffs or Walker did you? Rose was out because of poor play himself. However, his play calling presence may have helped the coverage busts so I'll give you that....but we don't know...maybe he gets torched all game.  Desperately needed? Hyperbole imo.

Is this a joke? Lol we literally started three guys who had no business being on the field because we had no depth alternatives

[Jesse]

1 hour ago, Mike said:

Is this a joke? Lol we literally started three guys who had no business being on the field because we had no depth alternatives

Who didn’t we have depth for?

Plenty of guys could have/should have been on the field for Bighill.

We had Rose inactive.

We had McCrae and Ambles ready to go at receiver (although we had too many injuries at receiver to reasonably cover).

The roster choices for those people were garbage, but I don’t we had choices to go to if we wanted to. MOS didn’t, unfortunately.

[17to85]

The whole point is the mos built the roster so as to have no depth on it during game day. It cost us the Grey Cup this year full stop.

We won in 2019 and 2021 because of functional depth on the game day roster. You think it's coincidence that as soon as they lost the depth on the DL they didn't win the Grey Cup anymore?

[Noeller]

Lack of depth and no bulldozer NT (both) on the DL have resulted in a lack of cups the last two chances... Not coincidence.

[Mike]

2 hours ago, Jesse said:

Who didn’t we have depth for?

Plenty of guys could have/should have been on the field for Bighill.

We had Rose inactive.

We had McCrae and Ambles ready to go at receiver (although we had too many injuries at receiver to reasonably cover).

The roster choices for those people were garbage, but I don’t we had choices to go to if we wanted to. MOS didn’t, unfortunately.

So then we didn’t have depth, is what you’re saying.

[Mark H.]

9 hours ago, Jesse said:

Who didn’t we have depth for?

Plenty of guys could have/should have been on the field for Bighill.

We had Rose inactive.

We had McCrae and Ambles ready to go at receiver (although we had too many injuries at receiver to reasonably cover).

The roster choices for those people were garbage, but I don’t we had choices to go to if we wanted to. MOS didn’t, unfortunately.

If I forget $100 at home on a shopping trip - I can't spend that money.

[Booch]

9 hours ago, Jesse said:

Who didn’t we have depth for?

Plenty of guys could have/should have been on the field for Bighill.

We had Rose inactive.

We had McCrae and Ambles ready to go at receiver (although we had too many injuries at receiver to reasonably cover).

The roster choices for those people were garbage, but I don’t we had choices to go to if we wanted to. MOS didn’t, unfortunately.

and who's fault is that??....MOS for not having an adequate PR and depth on roster. Ambles and even Alston would offered a heck of a lot on the active roster for the Grey Cup. Col and Clements taking Biggies reps and adding another giy...be it a dlineman or a DB would also added way more to the roster for the Grey Cup

Taking off Jackson and adding again....an actual contributing force on defence would have added a lot to the Grey Cup roster....Maybe utilizing the Nationalized American would have helped in what we did with the game day roster for the Grey Cup

Our coach hand-cuffed us worse than any game this yr, in a yr where he consistently handcuffed and he saved the worst of it for the biggest game of the year...thats facts and factored heavily into the loss....the 2nd one in a row now

7 hours ago, Mike said:

So then we didn’t have depth, is what you’re saying.

He'll eventually get it...

[Jesse]

4 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

If I forget $100 at home on a shopping trip - I can't spend that money.

I'm not saying it was the right decision. It's just a different argument/decision that what we've been having. People are moving the goalposts.

MOS made a comment about none of our players, that he can see, are "aging out". The roster management decisions (like keeping Jackson on at the expense of another receiver) are a different argument than Brandon Alexander is too old and is hurting the team. 

Bighill, Bryant, Collaros, Alexander, etc. may have lost a step form their prime, but none of them are liabilities out there (Injuries notwithstanding). And the depth guys like Briggs, whoever you bring in for them (rando Canadian draft pick from the last couple of years) isn't going to be so much more valuable that they make the impact the game is a way that some of you seem to think. 

_______________________________________

But completely separate from the "Aging out" discussion is the rostering decisions, which were just crazy in a lot of cases.

Jackson was a waste of a spot, period. Should have been used on a DL that we didn't even seem to have. That is at least partly a scouting fail. We ran without depth in the secondary for most of the season and mostly never hurt ys, but easily could have. And I guess it's fine if you want to commit to a "jack knife" as your receiver depth if that's what you feel your offense needs, but if he's the guy you trust, he needs to be active in a game in which the rest of your receivers are injured. If you don't trust him in that role, you needed to be developing a different guy all year - roster/scouting fail. 

[GCn20]

12 hours ago, wbbfan said:

No one said the offence wasn’t good in the regular season, and it was the total offence you know with the real mop Brady. Idk how you manage to not understand that. 

I understand it perfectly fine. I, also, understand that our passing game constitutes 60-70% of our play calls in any given game. IDK how you manage to not understand that.

10 hours ago, Mike said:

Is this a joke? Lol we literally started three guys who had no business being on the field because we had no depth alternatives

Not a joke at all. I just have no axe to grind. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by GCn20

[GCn20]

10 hours ago, Mike said:

Is this a joke? Lol we literally started three guys who had no business being on the field because we had no depth alternatives

Of course we had depth alternatives for each of them. That's just a flat out falsehood. We just chose not to go with that depth and dress 3 of our top players because our coach and these players felt they could play through that. Wrong decision in hindsight...definitely. Wrong decision to keep them in the game when we could have pulled them out. Definitely. But that's not a roster management issue, that's a starting lineup issue. We had our best possible replacements available and on the roster to replace them.

Edited November 29, 2023 by GCn20

[Booch]

bringing up a person//player///coach deficiencies or bad traits isn't axe grinding. its constructive criticism or pointing out the obvious....of all the tire pumping and axe grinding of Osh, any one of our coaches could have took this team to the GreyCup if he had to step away this yr for say a medical issue...personal reason...etc....There isn't something sneaky secretive he doing that no other coach would know....He's a good guy and players like him...players like it here as well and not just cause of him...Prob more so due to Wade and Walters...the good coach is cherry on top. To much weight is put on "players coach" tag...players will play for whomever, and will run through a wall for hard assed disciplinarian coaches too...see in first hand as they also know that coach will put his balls on the line for the team and get you where you need to go...and they follow....and also know a job isn't a right...it's earned and that can garner more respect than the Mr Nice guy I favour my vets and feel good stories..I have seen that philosophy fracture and divide a room as well...even though the team was killing it and looked tight

35 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Of course we had depth alternatives for each of them. That's just a flat out falsehood. We just chose not to go with that depth and dress 3 of our top players because our coach and these players felt they could play through that. Wrong decision in hindsight...definitely. Wrong decision to keep them in the game when we could have pulled them out. Definitely. But that's not a roster management issue, that's a starting lineup issue. We had our best possible replacements available and on the roster to replace them.

thats not really true.....2 of 3 players were shocked and one was totaly unprepared....sure they thanked coach for opp..what they supposed to do...toss him under bus?....but they knew they wouldnt be very effective.

Bailey as well I have on good account shouldn't have even been playing...but put it all out there...sure thats a great thing...love guys who have the guts and mindset to do it....but a coach should know also where and when to draw that line for the greater good.....we failed there....and starting lineup issue is totally a roster management issue...it was mismanaged on a gut feeling and blew up in our face....if our best possible replacements were on roster and were a hobbled ineffective Bighill....Bailey..Demski and Schoen who couldn't run 80 percent of the offence and the portion they could kinda run was ineffective and in some instances didnt even garner attention by Montreal defence and we fielded probably our worst DB before other healthy guys, and had guys like Bennett just stand around all game then our depth is terribly flawed and very weak.....

[Mark H.]

45 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

 But that's not a roster management issue, that's a starting lineup issue. We had our best possible replacements available and on the roster to replace them.

It's both. 

[GCn20]

5 minutes ago, Booch said:

bringing up a person//player///coach deficiencies or bad traits isn't axe grinding. its constructive criticism or pointing out the obvious....of all the tire pumping and axe grinding of Osh, any one of our coaches could have took this team to the GreyCup if he had to step away this yr for say a medical issue...personal reason...etc....There isn't something sneaky secretive he doing that no other coach would know....He's a good guy and players like him...players like it here as well and not just cause of him...Prob more so due to Wade and Walters...the good coach is cherry on top. To much weight is put on "players coach" tag...players will play for whomever, and will run through a wall for hard assed disciplinarian coaches too...see in first hand as they also know that coach will put his balls on the line for the team and get you where you need to go...and they follow....and also know a job isn't a right...it's earned and that can garner more respect than the Mr Nice guy I favour my vets and feel good stories..I have seen that philosophy fracture and divide a room as well...even though the team was killing it and looked tight

thats not really true.....2 of 3 players were shocked and one was totaly unprepared....sure they thanked coach for opp..what they supposed to do...toss him under bus?....but they knew they wouldnt be very effective.

Bailey as well I have on good account shouldn't have even been playing...but put it all out there...sure thats a great thing...love guys who have the guts and mindset to do it....but a coach should know also where and when to draw that line for the greater good.....we failed there....and starting lineup issue is totally a roster management issue...it was mismanaged on a gut feeling and blew up in our face....if our best possible replacements were on roster and were a hobbled ineffective Bighill....Bailey..Demski and Schoen who couldn't run 80 percent of the offence and the portion they could kinda run was ineffective and in some instances didnt even garner attention by Montreal defence and we fielded probably our worst DB before other healthy guys, and had guys like Bennett just stand around all game then our depth is terribly flawed and very weak.....

Totally agree that Biggie, Schoen, and Bailey should not have been playing in hindsight. I just don't think it was an egregious decision. Just one that didn't go our way. 

4 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

It's both. 

Who is playing on the 46 is not roster management. Roster management is who is on/off the roster. Once you are on the 46 whether you play or not is not a roster issue anymore, or at least not in the definition we have been hearing all year long here. The criticism was that we dressed injured guys with no one to back them up. Untrue. When Biggie sat on the turf stretching out his calf in the first Q, he should have been sat for the rest of the game and Clements take over. When the offence dried up in the 3rd Q, we should have done more mixing in with McCrae, BOLO, and Grant on offence. Again not roster issues, those guys were there ready to play.

Edited November 29, 2023 by GCn20

[Booch]

Just now, GCn20 said:

Totally agree that Biggie, Schoen, and Bailey should not have been playing in hindsight. I just don't think it was an egregious decision. Just one that didn't go our way. 

totally a horrible decision...and if any other coach in the league did that in the Grey Cup and played 4 guys who were clearly injured and shouldnt have been on field...in a Grey Cup we as a forum would have had a hayday chastising and laughing about it....same with due to all the injury issues and depth deficiencies dressing a fullback in lieu of an actual impactful player....if anyone says they wouldn't they are full of crap...But since 98% like to hang off Osh's nutsac here and defend everything he does to a fault...it was no big deal...over blown...axe grinding...personal dislike...call it whatever you want but it's kind of a joke...the dude effed up...badly with his roster...in the fricken Grey Cup....and many here said eventually this real bad flaw was gonna kill us at worst time....and it happened....plain and simple...it happened...personally I didnt want it to....but I saw it coming....and wasn't shocked

[17to85]

11 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Totally agree that Biggie, Schoen, and Bailey should not have been playing in hindsight. I just don't think it was an egregious decision. Just one that didn't go our way. 

Didn't need hindsight to see it... he'll I said right after he got hurt I was more worried about Bighill playing hurt than not playing... I'm not some spectacular football scout, but it is obvious that even fully healthy Bighill is basically at the end of his usefulness as a star middle linebacker, when hurt the guy is not gonna even be close to that. 

The receivers I think you can dress one gimpy guy but not as many as they did.

[GCn20]

9 minutes ago, Booch said:

totally a horrible decision...and if any other coach in the league did that in the Grey Cup and played 4 guys who were clearly injured and shouldnt have been on field...in a Grey Cup we as a forum would have had a hayday chastising and laughing about it....same with due to all the injury issues and depth deficiencies dressing a fullback in lieu of an actual impactful player....if anyone says they wouldn't they are full of crap...But since 98% like to hang off Osh's nutsac here and defend everything he does to a fault...it was no big deal...over blown...axe grinding...personal dislike...call it whatever you want but it's kind of a joke...the dude effed up...badly with his roster...in the fricken Grey Cup....and many here said eventually this real bad flaw was gonna kill us at worst time....and it happened....plain and simple...it happened...personally I didnt want it to....but I saw it coming....and wasn't shocked

Not hanging off his nutsac. That's just gaslighting. Because someone disagrees with your damage assessment does not mean they are hanging off Osh's nutsac.  You think his roster management cost us the Grey Cup, I disagree. I do not believe that Haba, Fox, and Rose on the roster gets us over the hump in that game. There were numerous opportunities for our team that we fielded to win that game easily and our mistakes cost us, not roster management...and no I do not for one second believe the mistakes I am referring to were because of roster management. Mental errors mostly. Blown coverages is not a function of roster management, red zone turnovers are not a function of roster management, wonky playcalling is not roster management. You can scream until you are blue in the face about roster management, that HAS been the axe you are grinding all year, but the Grey Cup was not lost because of it as much as you and Mike would like to have your AHA moment.

3 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Didn't need hindsight to see it... he'll I said right after he got hurt I was more worried about Bighill playing hurt than not playing... I'm not some spectacular football scout, but it is obvious that even fully healthy Bighill is basically at the end of his usefulness as a star middle linebacker, when hurt the guy is not gonna even be close to that. 

The receivers I think you can dress one gimpy guy but not as many as they did.

I think you can dress the receivers we did, but Buck needs a better gameplan and you gotta sprinkle in some of the backups. None of that happened. Bighill did not have the game of his life, but he wasn't a liability either. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by GCn20

[17to85]

4 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Blown coverages is not a function of roster management,

One injury forced 3 changes in the secondary and you don't think that is a factor in blown coverage? 

5 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

, but he wasn't a liability either

When you ate trying to win a championship you need better than "wasn't a liability"

[Booch]

27 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

One injury forced 3 changes in the secondary and you don't think that is a factor in blown coverage? 

When you ate trying to win a championship you need better than "wasn't a liability"

he also doesnt get it...a vet player...or one who has seen things 1000 times likely doent blow that coverage...the winning TD was a factor of a green compared to Rose or Lawrence DB in there

Having to shuffle 3 guys when Parker got hurt to actually field a defensive set, and one of whom who could barely run or have any explosive movement is also roster management issue...and cost us....If rose was dressed for Jackson...Biggie...then he slots into his normal spot...BA stays put...No Hallett....and Cole or Clemets is in Biggies spot...thats roster management if I ever saw it....

[Slimy Sculpin]

A lot of repetition here but still an enjoyable read with my second cup of coffee this morning. To me, in a nutshell, we (the Bombers) were outcoached (roster "management", schemes and  adjustments on both sides of the ball) in the most important game of the season...very frustrating for this armchair QB.

Now that management is back in place for the next couple of years, they can go about trying to piece together another solid and, hopefully, Grey Cup calibre team. It should be an interesting off-season.

[WBBFanWest]

A question for the many who are much more knowledgeable than me.  In regards to Bighill and Schoen, if they had not dressed and we had won, would they still have gotten their names on the cup and a ring?  I'm assuming they would have, but if not, I can understand why O'Shea would have been so determined to make sure that they dressed and played.

[Jesse]

1 minute ago, WBBFanWest said:

A question for the many who are much more knowledgeable than me.  In regards to Bighill and Schoen, if they had not dressed and we had won, would they still have gotten their names on the cup and a ring?  I'm assuming they would have, but if not, I can understand why O'Shea would have been so determined to make sure that they dressed and played.

They would not.

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

One injury forced 3 changes in the secondary and you don't think that is a factor in blown coverage? 

When you ate trying to win a championship you need better than "wasn't a liability"

One injury can cause that ripple effect at any point, even with depth dressed. You can't possibly cover off for every possible in game injury. Of course, moving people around can cause problems, No doubt about it. However, on two of the busts the person who busted coverage was in their proper spot. Only the Bighill/Alexander bust was roster related...MAYBE.

42 minutes ago, Booch said:

he also doesnt get it...a vet player...or one who has seen things 1000 times likely doent blow that coverage...the winning TD was a factor of a green compared to Rose or Lawrence DB in there

Having to shuffle 3 guys when Parker got hurt to actually field a defensive set, and one of whom who could barely run or have any explosive movement is also roster management issue...and cost us....If rose was dressed for Jackson...Biggie...then he slots into his normal spot...BA stays put...No Hallett....and Cole or Clemets is in Biggies spot...thats roster management if I ever saw it....

I get it just fine. I just don't agree with you. There is a difference. I absolutely concede, and have all year, that roster management in some areas needs improvement. What you will never get me to concede, because I know it not to be true, is that roster management cost us any game this year. I cannot think of a single game where roster management was a deciding factor. Not one. We had a 10 point half time lead in the Grey Cup, and it went in the shitter when we tried to protect that lead instead of playing to win. We lost that game on lousy play calling, and mental errors by players. If you want to attribute 5% of the blame to roster managment....OK...that would be about right.

Edited November 29, 2023 by GCn20

[Booch]

4 minutes ago, WBBFanWest said:

A question for the many who are much more knowledgeable than me.  In regards to Bighill and Schoen, if they had not dressed and we had won, would they still have gotten their names on the cup and a ring?  I'm assuming they would have, but if not, I can understand why O'Shea would have been so determined to make sure that they dressed and played.

ring yah...name on cup no

2 minutes ago, Jesse said:

They would not.

would have got a ring...same with guys on PR..They get rings too...and injured list

[Jesse]

7 minutes ago, Booch said:

ring yah...name on cup no

would have got a ring...same with guys on PR..They get rings too...and injured list

I didn't see the ring part, my bad.

[Stickem]

33 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

 If you want to attribute 5% of the blame to roster managment....OK...that would be about right.

So you are finally admitting that roster management was a contributing factor to our Cup loss.....Well that's a start ....I think the percentage is a lot higher BUT I'll accept that....I would like to say that 'contributing factor 'could have been avoided and was the difference in a Cup win and a Cup loss....Also it should never have occurred in a game of that importance....