Burke Unhappy With Work Of Veterans

[Guest]

Here we go again, Elliott vs. Buck.

Hate to burst the bubble of some, but it doesn't even sound like Eliott will stick around in BC. I really don't get peoples love for Elliott or even Hall now, it's almost like their bias against Buck leads to having sexual fantasies about the other QBS. Elliott's gone because Burke and Crowton didn't want him here, deal with it.

 

 

As for the actual topic at hand, considering the top units/veterans didn't play much I'm not sure that Burke has much to go on, so I believe he's talking about how they came out with a dud, the start itself not so much how they played overall, could be wrong though. I for one love Coach Burke's honesty in the media, I hope he becomes a Head Coach that coaches to win as opposed to coaching not to lose, saw some of that last year which worried me a bit, but Burke is a first time HC, I'm willing to give him some time.

[Atomic]

But Pierce is a WINNER!!!!!! that guy left the team in so many holes last year when he got hurt it's not even funny and yet people still go on like he does only good things when he's out there and it's just the injuries that hold him back. Maybe in the past, but the pick 6 down the sideline has been a Pierce specialty for a while now. 

 

Yeah you're right let's just stick with the losing QB who shows no signs of improving... simply because he will stay healthy.

 

Brilliant.

[17to85]

  Because he protects the ball and he can make **** happen when the team needs it most.

 

 

can he really? He had as many ints as td passes last season, the season before he had more ints than td passes... I'll say it again, the Buck Pierce we got back in 2010 is long gone, the guy who's there now is a much different player.

[Mike]

Maybe, maybe not.

 

But Buck can move the ball, he's not completely useless as you guys are making him out to be.  He had a bad year, for sure... but he's a winning QB and he always has been.  Because he protects the ball and he can make **** happen when the team needs it most.

 

Look, I'm not happy we're stuck with Pierce again either, I think it's insane.  But I'd rather go with someone who has a chance to be good rather than a proven flop like Elliott.

 

I don't think he makes anything happen when we need it the most.

 

He threw up a shitter in the Grey Cup during the 2011 season and wasn't around to redeem himself the following year because of injury after injury. I mean really, he makes it happen when we need it the most? How can I possibly agree with that after he rode an outstanding defense and a career day by Chris Garrett to the Grey Cup before failing to score a single touchdown until BC dropped into a prevent defense.

 

(BTW, just want to say threads like this make me glad we cut ties with the other site ... this is really good discussion)

[17to85]

Yeah you're right let's just stick with the losing QB who shows no signs of improving... simply because he will stay healthy.

 

Brilliant.

At this point it's better than sticking with a declining qb who can't stay healthy.

[Atomic]

I don't think he makes anything happen when we need it the most.

 

He threw up a shitter in the Grey Cup during the 2011 season and wasn't around to redeem himself the following year because of injury after injury. I mean really, he makes it happen when we need it the most? How can I possibly agree with that after he rode an outstanding defense and a career day by Chris Garrett to the Grey Cup before failing to score a single touchdown until BC dropped into a prevent defense.

 

(BTW, just want to say threads like this make me glad we cut ties with the other site ... this is really good discussion)

 

Good discussion, I agree.

 

Anyways, Pierce did ride Garrett to that victory.  And Elliott probably would have turned the ball over on a stupid play trying to be a hero and lost it for us.

 

Like I said though, I'm not even a big Pierce fan.  I was just really unimpressed with Elliott and I'm glad we moved on.  Hopefully we can get enough mileage out of Pierce that one of our backups has enough time to learn and rise to the occasion because honestly that's our only hope.

[blitzmore]

Good discussion, I agree.

 

Anyways, Pierce did ride Garrett to that victory.  And Elliott probably would have turned the ball over on a stupid play trying to be a hero and lost it for us.

 

Like I said though, I'm not even a big Pierce fan.  I was just really unimpressed with Elliott and I'm glad we moved on.  Hopefully we can get enough mileage out of Pierce that one of our backups has enough time to learn and rise to the occasion because honestly that's our only hope.

Kind of sounds to me like you're basing the greater percentage of your opinion about Elliott on one game only.

[17to85]

Kind of sounds to me like you're basing the greater percentage of your opinion about Elliott on one game only.

well 2 games most likely. Calgary and Toronto he had issues with the turnovers... and of course he was the qb of note on labour day but I don't put too much stock in that one simply based on how bad the entire team looked. That was a team completely unprepared to play that game, that one goes on the coaches shoulders IMO.

[Mr Dee]

 Hopefully we can get enough mileage out of Pierce that one of our backups has enough time to learn and rise to the occasion because honestly that's our only hope.

And there it is. This is exactly what we need. Enough time out of Pierce so as someone, anyone, has the time to step up. It really is about the next one stepping up, right soon.

[SmokinBlue]

No we've tried that, it doesn't work, none of them will develop taking pointers from Pierce or practicing behind Pierce. What we need is to say good riddance to Pierce, as coach, as player as everything, and move on in the QB department. Pierce needs to piss off and stop holding this franchise back already.

[TrueBlue]

well 2 games most likely. Calgary and Toronto he had issues with the turnovers... and of course he was the qb of note on labour day but I don't put too much stock in that one simply based on how bad the entire team looked. That was a team completely unprepared to play that game, that one goes on the coaches shoulders IMO.

 

That debacle wasn't just on the coaches.  It was an team completely unprepared, but also a team completely inept and unable to execute.  That one goes to the players as much as the coaches.  

[Atomic]

Kind of sounds to me like you're basing the greater percentage of your opinion about Elliott on one game only.

 

Not at all.  2-7 as a starter and only threw a TD pass in 2 of those 9 games.... certainly not just basing it off one game, but if I wanted to there is a handful to choose from.

[SmokinBlue]

He's basing it off stats, and failing to think for himself or use basic common sense.

[Atomic]

He's basing it off stats, and failing to think for himself or use basic common sense.

 

Not even slightly.  But feel free to politely go **** yourself for making that assumption.

[Mr Dee]

Not even slightly.  But feel free to politely go **** yourself for making that assumption.

Smoke got in his eyes.

[DR. CFL]

Agree or not or like it or not one of the major philosophical differences with both Murphy and Ritchie was they did not call out individuals(by name) in the media. Any individual criticism was behind closed doors with the team. You don't motivate professional athletes by calling them out a public venue. Ultimately that impacts respect and turns into a negative environment

.

[17to85]

That debacle wasn't just on the coaches.  It was an team completely unprepared, but also a team completely inept and unable to execute.  That one goes to the players as much as the coaches.  

but to single people out even if you attribute it to players is wrong as well. It was a collective pants shitting by the team, I'm not going to be too hard on the qb for that just because he's the qb when everyone involved in that messed their drawers.

[DR. CFL]

I am not suggesting blaming QBs , it is more appropriate to say we did not execute offensively, players missed assignments or other more general analysis. Heaven forbid a HC would say the OC has a limited working knowledge of the CFL game or that I as an HC have limited game, field position and clock management experience as a HC in the CFL.

Unlike LaPo who's issue was he tried to manage everything.

[do or die]

Vince Lombardi and Bart Starr, could of been standing there......but not much one can do....when about 30 guys lie down like a cheap rug.... in a supposed must game/rivalry game.....and lets an pretty average team (Riders)....simply walk all over them.

[iso_55]

Trouble is, we've kept most of the guys who showed no character last year. So, nothing's changed.

[Captain Blue]

My biggest issue with Tim Burke is not what he says, but rather that he has decided to stick with Buck Pierce despite seeing what has happened in previous years with him. 

[17to85]

Trouble is, we've kept most of the guys who showed no character last year. So, nothing's changed.

I think it's a bigger issue with not getting a coach that can inspire the players. Lapo was so passive and I don't think he was any screaming hell for firing up a team, and based on the evidence we have they respond even less to Burke... If this year doesn't work out then I think we can clearly say that Mack failed at being able to identify a quality head coach.

[Captain Blue]

I think it's a bigger issue with not getting a coach that can inspire the players. Lapo was so passive and I don't think he was any screaming hell for firing up a team, and based on the evidence we have they respond even less to Burke... If this year doesn't work out then I think we can clearly say that Mack failed at being able to identify a quality head coach.

 

Personally I feel like the ability to "inspire" or "motivate" is overblown.  These guys shouldn't need motivation and if they do then maybe that's been the problem all along. Really I'd rather just have a coach that excels at the Xs and Os of the game.

[17to85]

Personally I feel like the ability to "inspire" or "motivate" is overblown.  These guys shouldn't need motivation and if they do then maybe that's been the problem all along. Really I'd rather just have a coach that excels at the Xs and Os of the game.

If that were true you wouldn't see certain players perform better with certain people coaching. The key to coaching these days is really understanding what makes each individual player tick so you can get the best out of them every single day. Time have changed from the days when you just expected players to show up and be their best and if not the coach cracks the whip on them. 

[Captain Blue]

If that were true you wouldn't see certain players perform better with certain people coaching. The key to coaching these days is really understanding what makes each individual player tick so you can get the best out of them every single day. Time have changed from the days when you just expected players to show up and be their best and if not the coach cracks the whip on them. 

 

I would argue that the reason players perform better with different coaches is that the other coach or coaches have found better ways to get more out of him with a scheme, less because they were able to inspire them.