Wiecek Article

[Armchair GM]

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/football/bombers/buck-and-the-boys-prep-for-eastern-trek-must-win-no-but-214109361.html

 

 

Buck and the boys prep for Eastern trek Schedule doesn't get any easier after stiff test in Als' territory

By: Paul Wiecek

Posted: 1:00 AM | Comments: 2 | Last Modified: 6:44 AM | Updates

It is, of course, utterly preposterous to suggest that the second game of any 18-game schedule is a must-win.

Just ask Winnipeg Blue Bombers head coach Tim Burke: "I think that's guys in the press overblowing things," Burke said Tuesday after putting his team through their final full practice at Investors Group Field in advance of his club's rematch with the Alouettes Thursday night in Montreal.

So let's concede the point. No, the 0-1 Bombers (who lost 38-33 at home to the Als in Week 1) do not need to win in Montreal this week to continue to have a viable 2013 CFL season.

But indulge us just for a moment as we play out the scenario where the Bombers lose for the second straight week to Montreal, as the oddsmakers -- who've installed the Als as 7.5-point favourites this week -- expect Winnipeg to do.

What does that look like? Well, the 0-2 Bombers would then in Week 3 have to head back out on the road to Guelph, where the Hamilton Tiger-Cats destroyed Winnipeg's backups 52-0 just a couple weeks ago in the final game of the pre-season.

The Ticats would almost certainly be heavy favourites versus Winnipeg again, particularly after the Tabbies in all likelihood crush a truly awful visiting Edmonton Eskimos squad this weekend.

If things play out as expected in Guelph, the 0-3 Bombers would finally return home on July 19 to face the defending Grey Cup champion Toronto Argonauts -- and need to win just to avoid starting the season at 0-4 for the second straight year.

In case you've forgotten what that movie looks like, the 2012 Bombers parlayed an 0-4 start into the mid-season firing of a head coach and a dreadful 6-12 final regular season record.

Dreams

And what about after that? Well, Week 5 sees the Bombers hosting a Calgary Stampeders squad that looked very impressive in beating the B.C. Lions in Week 1. And that's followed in Week 6 by a Winnipeg visit to play the Lions at B.C. Place, the sports venue in Canada where Bombers dreams have gone to die in recent years.

And so put it all together and you've got this: No, the Bombers don't have to win Thursday night in Montreal. But losing to the Als again would really suck, and potentially set in motion a chain of events that could make for a very, very long season. Again.

That's very high stakes very early in the season. And so little wonder, then, that the Bombers players on Tuesday -- to a man -- seemed to be doing their best to dampen expectations this week and put whatever happens in Montreal into the context of a much larger picture.

"I don't think it's a must-win game right now," insisted slotback Terrence Edwards. "0-2 is not something we want to do, but it's not the end of the world. We've got plenty more games to play to rectify the problem.

"But I don't see us going (to Montreal) and not playing well. I think we're going to go in there, play well and put ourselves in a position to win the game."

Bombers centre Justin Sorensen was one of the few players Tuesday who agreed this week's contest was a must-win, but he qualified that by saying that's no different than any week.

"They're all must-win games, you know that," Sorensen said. "And I think we let a win get away from us last week. So I think we're motivated this week to come out and stick it to them."

Bombers cornerback Jovon Johnson said he's taking the long view right now and rejected any parallels with the start of last season.

"We've got different guys and different coaches this year. And I think we're handling things a lot differently than last year. This year has nothing to do with last year," said Johnson.

Which brings us back to Burke, who went out of his way on Tuesday to point out a couple things:

First, the Toronto Argonauts also started sluggish during the 2012 regular season and finished a measly 9-9 in the regular season before running the table and winning the Grey Cup.

And second, not all 0-4 season starts are created equal. "It's how we went 0-4 too," Burke said of last year's start. "We went 0-4 ugly.

"Certainly, I think if we play close (in 2013) and we were 0-4, you'd look at that stat differently. But I don't plan on doing that."

paul.wiecek@freepress.mb.ca

 

 

I am so sick of reading this trolling nonsense out of Wiecek.  For a guy who's prior resume includes horseracing, curling, and grade three kickball; the end-of-the-spectrum negatron trolling is rather grating to read...

 

Is it really reporting to suggest the Bombers AFTER ONE GAME are on track to not only lose at Montreal (a team they just played reasonably well against)? 

 

Until the Bombers win some games and regularly put out strongly competitive efforts; we are going to be underdogs weekly.  So don't feel you need to write articles that say "The 0-2 Bombers will have to go back to Guelph to play what will be heavily-favoured Tiger Cats; a place they lost 52-0."  When we're only 0-1 at present.

 

When you're coming off a horrendous season and start the year 0-1, of course every game on the schedule looks like an uphill battle right now.  But that's why you have the offseason and training camp... to effect some change, and possibly improve your roster.

 

My humble suggestion for Wiecek and the Freep: Take the pen out of his hand for a month, and send him to every football game you can in 30 days.  Of course, this won't happen because the paper likely can't afford to, and secondly, his ego wouldn't allow him to accept that he doesn't know anything about the game.  But to actually get some sort of football analysis out of him (even if trolling) instead of this drivel, would be an improvement.

[Super Duper Negatron]

I read it this morning and thought it was awful. He said the Montreal game was a must win because after that we have a tough schedule, and then proceeded to list essentially every other team in the league as evidence. Basically he said we need to beat Montreal on the road, because they are only team we are capable of beating. Which makes no sense.

[17to85]

The thing that pissed me off most is that you can see that he's not a CFL follower and just a race track guy. All the talk about odds and crap like that... Get the **** out of here Paul. The CFL is one of the most unpredictable leagues out there, odds don't mean a god damned thing. It's not his fault though, he's admitted that he doesn't give a rip about the CFL so why is the free press expecting him to be able to properly comment on things in that league? 

[Atomic]

I didn't mind it.  Silly article but it mainly just highlights that there is a tough road ahead, which is true.  Best way to silence this type of article is to win some games.

[Noeller]

It's not just Wiecek, but the vast majority of Bombers media are negative. Their first reaction is always a negative one. I can't think of another city where you'd get away with this....

[Mike]

I'm going to carry a copy of that article around with me.

 

For toilet paper.

[NotoriousBIG]

It's not just Wiecek, but the vast majority of Bombers media are negative. Their first reaction is always a negative one. I can't think of another city where you'd get away with this....

 

Why should he be glowingly positive? We haven't been a good football team offensively in a very long time. And Game One was no better. 

 

If you want all sunshine and rainbows, read the Leader Post in SK. Their GM can fondle little girls and the reporters don't even have the balls to ask the team to comment on it. 

[Brandon]

The article is garbage however he does speak the truth, it is a must win game for us.

Last week our offense definitely was missing for a large part of the game. If we roll over and die then the fans will be pissed and management will be under fire.

The folks of Winnipeg have no more patience so essentially every week its a must win game.

[Noeller]

Why should he be glowingly positive? We haven't been a good football team offensively in a very long time. And Game One was no better. 

 

If you want all sunshine and rainbows, read the Leader Post in SK. Their GM can fondle little girls and the reporters don't even have the balls to ask the team to comment on it. 

Who said anything about glowingly positive?? Why is it always black and white with you people??? You know, there's a really nice middle ground where it's nice and neutral. Irving and Tait are masters of it...

[Gold Donny]

Here, wash it down with something positive from Greg Frers at the CBC:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/football/opinion/2013/07/blue-bombers-defence-stands-out-in-week-1.html

[bluto]

for me, the underlying thrust of the article was that the Bombers face a tough road ahead. i don't see a problem with someone suggesting that if the Bombers lose in Montreal that they will be putting themselves in a very tough spot... since they will be.

 

all points to the contrary (ie: the season is still young, the CFL is erratic and arbitrary) are also valid... but the writer was saying that if the Bombers (for some reason) weren't feeling pressure this weekend... they ought to be. 

 

hell, if i was a Bomber i'd be telling everyone that it was a must-win... i'd tell them that every frickin week.

[17to85]

Why should he be glowingly positive? We haven't been a good football team offensively in a very long time. And Game One was no better. 

 

If you want all sunshine and rainbows, read the Leader Post in SK. Their GM can fondle little girls and the reporters don't even have the balls to ask the team to comment on it. 

It's not about wanting sunshine and rainbows, it's about wanting a good balanced piece. No overly positive or negative slant, just tell it like it is. And insisting that these guys suck and if they lose this week there's no hope of winning much at all is not that. There's only one team, maybe 2 that didn't show some pretty massive holes over the first week, majority of the teams look very beatable. 

[17to85]

for me, the underlying thrust of the article was that the Bombers face a tough road ahead. i don't see a problem with someone suggesting that if the Bombers lose in Montreal that they will be putting themselves in a very tough spot... since they will be.

 

all points to the contrary (ie: the season is still young, the CFL is erratic and arbitrary) are also valid... but the writer was saying that if the Bombers (for some reason) weren't feeling pressure this weekend... they ought to be. 

 

hell, if i was a Bomber i'd be telling everyone that it was a must-win... i'd tell them that every frickin week.

but there's a big difference between saying that, and saying what the article actually said. He brought up the 52-0 preseason loss like it mattered... not a lot of roster players were in that game. It also seems to indicate that both Hamilton and Toronto looked good in week one which may be true of their offenses but both defenses looked like garbage.... Then he trots out the teams go to die in BC place and all sorts of other things. It's not just as simple as saying "the CFL is tough, gotta get some wins early" it's saying "this team sucks and if they don't win now they have no hope in hell of winning this season" It's not surprise you don't mind it, you are already of the opinion that the bombers suck ass so it's just confirmation bias to you. 

[bluto]

but there's a big difference between saying that, and saying what the article actually said. He brought up the 52-0 preseason loss like it mattered... not a lot of roster players were in that game. It also seems to indicate that both Hamilton and Toronto looked good in week one which may be true of their offenses but both defenses looked like garbage.... Then he trots out the teams go to die in BC place and all sorts of other things. It's not just as simple as saying "the CFL is tough, gotta get some wins early" it's saying "this team sucks and if they don't win now they have no hope in hell of winning this season" It's not surprise you don't mind it, you are already of the opinion that the bombers suck ass so it's just confirmation bias to you. 

 

i know what you're saying. he did say that it was Winnipeg's backups that got beat 52-nada though.

 

and i don't think he's saying "win now or you have no hope in hell of winning this season", i got more of a "win now or you'll risk stepping into a hole that you may not be able to get out of later" from it.

 

also: Toronto only gave up 3 points in the second half... so it's more accurate to say that they were garbage for a half.

[TrueBlue]

Here, wash it down with something positive from Greg Frers at the CBC:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/football/opinion/2013/07/blue-bombers-defence-stands-out-in-week-1.html

 

Love that Devon Washington guy.

[Fraser]

I guess my biggest problem with all the prognostication is that it's based on one game and in some cases not even that.

 

We are in trouble after one loss but BC has the same record (a worse beating) and we should be scared of them.

 

I heard troy on the radio say that we should fear Hamilton in a few weeks, how do you say that after their recent effort?

[TrueBlue]

I guess my biggest problem with all the prognostication is that it's based on one game and in some cases not even that.

 

We are in trouble after one loss but BC has the same record (a worse beating) and we should be scared of them.

 

I heard troy on the radio say that we should fear Hamilton in a few weeks, how do you say that after their recent effort?

 

As far as I am concerned, Hamilton is just as exposed as they were last season.  Having home field this season won't be much of an advantage for them either.  

[17to85]

i know what you're saying. he did say that it was Winnipeg's backups that got beat 52-nada though.

 

and i don't think he's saying "win now or you have no hope in hell of winning this season", i got more of a "win now or you'll risk stepping into a hole that you may not be able to get out of later" from it.

 

also: Toronto only gave up 3 points in the second half... so it's more accurate to say that they were garbage for a half.

 

 

spin harder. you know damned well that's a disingenuous argument. 

 

but seriously maybe you just don't read weicek enough if you really think that was his point.... he is very negative and a lot of it does stem from him not liking the CFL (he's said this before) so he doesn't care to look in depth into anything and he's a sour person so he always takes the worst case scenario with every bomber loss. 

[bluto]

spin harder. you know damned well that's a disingenuous argument.

 

but seriously maybe you just don't read weicek enough if you really think that was his point.... he is very negative and a lot of it does stem from him not liking the CFL (he's said this before) so he doesn't care to look in depth into anything and he's a sour person so he always takes the worst case scenario with every bomber loss. 

 

actually, it's a factual one. problem? 

[Adrenaline_x]

Really I think every player and coach should see the next game as must win.. If you aren't in that mindset you are more likely to be off your game or unfocused.

 

No game is a MUST win game unless you are one win out of the playoffs and if you win you are in but the team should be approaching each game like its the most important game of the year atleast untill they are ahead in the standings

[Armchair GM]

Why should he be glowingly positive? We haven't been a good football team offensively in a very long time. And Game One was no better. 

 

If you want all sunshine and rainbows, read the Leader Post in SK. Their GM can fondle little girls and the reporters don't even have the balls to ask the team to comment on it. 

 

The other posters hit it on the head... you don't have to be glowingly positive.  But you probably should understand a thing or two about football if you are going to write about it.  That and not continue to have your nose out of joint because Joe Mack jilted an interview request 2 years ago when you were so fresh off the racetrack and still reeked of horse manure. 

 

My point is that Wiecek's article is firmly focused on the negative that is losing the 1st game of the season, and what he considers a less than 1% chance at winning in Montreal.  And then we'll get smoked in Hamilton because we lost 52-0 there (notwithstanding that about 5 of those guys made our roster).  Then we have to beat the Argos at home, and they won the GC last year, so that won't happen.  And Calgary's playing really well... can't win that one either.  Then BC... my Lord.  We'll be 0-6, and Commissioner Cohon will move them to Phoenix to save the franchise!

 

Where in there are the positives that came from the way our defense pressured Calvillo in week 1?  What about how well in a couple of spurts a rusty Buck Pierce played; and how that might translate into a better overall game this week?  It is just painfully apparent that he has either no idea, or just doesn't care if we played good, bad, ugly, or 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers football.  Lawless' trolling is at least augmented by somewhat understanding and watching football.

[Zontar]

HAM's defense sucking is certainly fair game but lets take it week to week to see if it progresses. No way Austin is going to let it rot like Cortez did last year. He's already made more moves this week than Cortez did almost all of last year.

[NotoriousBIG]

HAM's defense sucking is certainly fair game but lets take it week to week to see if it progresses. No way Austin is going to let it rot like Cortez did last year. He's already made more moves this week than Cortez did almost all of last year.

 

Calling Zontar! This is Hank Bain -- I've almost secured the SCTV offices! Although, according to the Planetary Almanac, the planet Zontar is about to get hit by a giant asteroid....

[SPuDS]

horrid article written by an hack trying to make himself relevant.. why is it so hard for guys to write like tait? tell it like it is and not embellish to hell and gone?

i guess copying friesen is just easier..

[Zontar]

Calling Zontar! This is Hank Bain -- I've almost secured the SCTV offices! Although, according to the Planetary Almanac, the planet Zontar is about to get hit by a giant asteroid....

You'll need an advent screen. You do have an advent screen, don't you ?