Bombers interested in Romby Bryant?

[Mike]

Why do you equate being honest with publicly trashing players?  I'm not expect him to 'throw anyone under the bus'.  Just tell the truth and cut the BS.

 

I don't know what O'Shea does in private because I'm not there.  I respectfully submit that you don't know either.  I certainly hope he's different behind closed doors.

 

I haven't listened to the coaches show.  I haven't read anything he's divulged on these sites from the coaches show either.  I do know that everything else O'Shea has said in the media is 'super positive'.  He tries to turn every negative into a positive no matter how much of a stretch it is or how silly it sounds.  Everyone knows that all the players who made the team aren't starters.  That's like giving everyone participation ribbons.  Unless O'Shea is brain dead, and I personally don't think he is, he has to be concerned with parts of the team.

 

The whole idea that saying nice things will somehow make the team better is ridiculous.

 

This right here tells me that no matter what, even if we have a perfect head coach, you won't like him.

 

Because a perfect coach won't tell you what you want to hear in public.

 

What you're failing to acknowledge is that there's a difference between "saying nice things" and "saying nice things *in public*" ... he's a no nonsense type coach by all accounts, if you trust the players he has coached in past and present. But in the public eye, when everything needs to be cool, calm, collected and balanced? He's not going to give the media anything to run with. And that's how it should be.

 

But you'll never acknowledge it because you can't get 100% guaranteed confirmation that he ISN'T like that in the locker room, despite every single account telling you that he isn't.

[M.O.A.B.]

One thing for sure, O'shea knows what kind of media we have in Winnipeg and certainly knows how to play with them.

[KptKrunch]

I actually like his attitude of having '42' starters. I mean, Burgess, look at it this way, you got Offense, you have defense, and you have Special Teams. Or do you not consider someone starting on 'special teams' a starter. I sure do. Now, still doing the math, that's '36' and we know there are players who 'start' on two of the three teams all over the place. But, there are injuries, there are rest breaks (for lineman especially). So when a player goes in to sub for an injury, or to give a player a rest, is he not 'starting' at that point.

 

No, he may not be on the field for the opening snap, but riddle me this, opening snap, the Bombers run a play with 6 receivers and an empty backfield. Now assuming (from the depth chart) that Ford is the 'starting tailback' but is not on the field for the 'opening snap', is he now, in your eyes, not a starter? Just because you're on not on the field for the first play doesn't mean you're not a 'starter'.

 

To me, all that O'Shea is saying is that if you're dressing for the game, you prepare for that game like you're a starter because I expect you to play like one if I need you. That's a big attitude shift and since neither you nor I have ever played Pro football, and O'Shea has, he could very well see his squad this way, and treat them this way. If I were the 42nd man, I can tell you personally I'd appreciate that kind of attitude from my coach very much. 

[DR. CFL]

Prepare as a starter and the HC just prays he doesn't have to play you.....the reality of a team with limited depth.

[Mike]

Prepare as a starter and the HC just prays he doesn't have to play you.....the reality of a team with limited depth.

 

You know, for a doctor, I'm surprised you haven't been able to diagnose that the horse you're beating is dead already.

[DR. CFL]

Because? People seem to love it when the HC blows smoke up people's' butts? Sorry I don't inhale.

[Mr. Perfect]

[mbrg]

The whole idea that saying nice things will somehow make the team better is ridiculous.

 

That's why no one said it.

 

Except you.

[blitzmore]

Because? People seem to love it when the HC blows smoke up people's' butts? Sorry I don't inhale.

No but you exhale a lot of smoke which goes up our butts!

[TBURGESS]

 

Why do you equate being honest with publicly trashing players?  I'm not expect him to 'throw anyone under the bus'.  Just tell the truth and cut the BS.

 

I don't know what O'Shea does in private because I'm not there.  I respectfully submit that you don't know either.  I certainly hope he's different behind closed doors.

 

I haven't listened to the coaches show.  I haven't read anything he's divulged on these sites from the coaches show either.  I do know that everything else O'Shea has said in the media is 'super positive'.  He tries to turn every negative into a positive no matter how much of a stretch it is or how silly it sounds.  Everyone knows that all the players who made the team aren't starters.  That's like giving everyone participation ribbons.  Unless O'Shea is brain dead, and I personally don't think he is, he has to be concerned with parts of the team.

 

The whole idea that saying nice things will somehow make the team better is ridiculous.

 

This right here tells me that no matter what, even if we have a perfect head coach, you won't like him.

 

Because a perfect coach won't tell you what you want to hear in public.

 

What you're failing to acknowledge is that there's a difference between "saying nice things" and "saying nice things *in public*" ... he's a no nonsense type coach by all accounts, if you trust the players he has coached in past and present. But in the public eye, when everything needs to be cool, calm, collected and balanced? He's not going to give the media anything to run with. And that's how it should be.

 

But you'll never acknowledge it because you can't get 100% guaranteed confirmation that he ISN'T like that in the locker room, despite every single account telling you that he isn't.

 

I acknowledged that there's a difference between what's said in public and in private in the second sentence of the post you quoted.   It's you who's failing to acknowledge that you don't know actually what's being said in private.  

 

O'Shea has been completely one sided in his public comments, not balanced.  Most of it's BS and everyone knows that.  I'm not expecting insider tips, or dirty laundry, or info that could hurt the team.  I am expecting more than 'everyone who makes the team is a starter' or the Alfred E Neumanesc and 'what me worry' statements.

 

I don't dislike O'Shea and given time, he may become the next good CFL HC.  In fact, it's the 'Only say good things' that I dislike and those who think that's leadership.

[TBURGESS]

I actually like his attitude of having '42' starters. I mean, Burgess, look at it this way, you got Offense, you have defense, and you have Special Teams. Or do you not consider someone starting on 'special teams' a starter. I sure do. Now, still doing the math, that's '36' and we know there are players who 'start' on two of the three teams all over the place. But, there are injuries, there are rest breaks (for lineman especially). So when a player goes in to sub for an injury, or to give a player a rest, is he not 'starting' at that point.

 

No, he may not be on the field for the opening snap, but riddle me this, opening snap, the Bombers run a play with 6 receivers and an empty backfield. Now assuming (from the depth chart) that Ford is the 'starting tailback' but is not on the field for the 'opening snap', is he now, in your eyes, not a starter? Just because you're on not on the field for the first play doesn't mean you're not a 'starter'.

 

To me, all that O'Shea is saying is that if you're dressing for the game, you prepare for that game like you're a starter because I expect you to play like one if I need you. That's a big attitude shift and since neither you nor I have ever played Pro football, and O'Shea has, he could very well see his squad this way, and treat them this way. If I were the 42nd man, I can tell you personally I'd appreciate that kind of attitude from my coach very much. 

There are starters and there are backups on every team, the Bombers included.  The starters have earned the right to be called starters and the backups hope to earn that right.  The starters and the backups know who they are.  The opposing coaches know who they are.  Everyone who watches tonight's game will know who they are.  It's no big secret that the coach has to protect.

 

To me calling everyone starters is the same as giving everyone a participation ribbon in grade school.

[Mike]

 

I actually like his attitude of having '42' starters. I mean, Burgess, look at it this way, you got Offense, you have defense, and you have Special Teams. Or do you not consider someone starting on 'special teams' a starter. I sure do. Now, still doing the math, that's '36' and we know there are players who 'start' on two of the three teams all over the place. But, there are injuries, there are rest breaks (for lineman especially). So when a player goes in to sub for an injury, or to give a player a rest, is he not 'starting' at that point.

 

No, he may not be on the field for the opening snap, but riddle me this, opening snap, the Bombers run a play with 6 receivers and an empty backfield. Now assuming (from the depth chart) that Ford is the 'starting tailback' but is not on the field for the 'opening snap', is he now, in your eyes, not a starter? Just because you're on not on the field for the first play doesn't mean you're not a 'starter'.

 

To me, all that O'Shea is saying is that if you're dressing for the game, you prepare for that game like you're a starter because I expect you to play like one if I need you. That's a big attitude shift and since neither you nor I have ever played Pro football, and O'Shea has, he could very well see his squad this way, and treat them this way. If I were the 42nd man, I can tell you personally I'd appreciate that kind of attitude from my coach very much. 

There are starters and there are backups on every team, the Bombers included.  The starters have earned the right to be called starters and the backups hope to earn that right.  The starters and the backups know who they are.  The opposing coaches know who they are.  Everyone who watches tonight's game will know who they are.  It's no big secret that the coach has to protect.

 

To me calling everyone starters is the same as giving everyone a participation ribbon in grade school.

 

 

Then I would venture a guess that you didn't interpret the point of his comment properly.

[TBURGESS]

I guess you misunderstood the question he was asked.  The media wanted to know who the starters were.  O'Shea refused to answer the question and fed them hackneyed 'They are all starters' response.

[Mike]

I guess you misunderstood the question he was asked.  The media wanted to know who the starters were.  O'Shea refused to answer the question and fed them hackneyed 'They are all starters' response.

 

What's your point?

[TBURGESS]

O'Shea wasn't protecting some state secret.  He was being given an opportunity to recognise those players who'd worked their butts off to earn the starters spots and to get some much needed good press.  He chose instead to verbally give the middle finger to the media.  There is a group around here who applaud that, and call it leadership, but I'm not one of them.

 

Lets just agree to disagree because saying anything negative about O'Shea these days is like saying anything negative about Mack in the IMWT days.  It's just going to start arguments from mostly the same folks.

[Mr. Perfect]

It's not about saying anything negative about O'Shea. He's simply doing what any good coach would do for the betterment of the team and despite nearly everyone telling you that, you're failing to recognize that fact. Any coach with a good grasp of team morale would have answered the question the exact same way.

[KptKrunch]

 

I actually like his attitude of having '42' starters. I mean, Burgess, look at it this way, you got Offense, you have defense, and you have Special Teams. Or do you not consider someone starting on 'special teams' a starter. I sure do. Now, still doing the math, that's '36' and we know there are players who 'start' on two of the three teams all over the place. But, there are injuries, there are rest breaks (for lineman especially). So when a player goes in to sub for an injury, or to give a player a rest, is he not 'starting' at that point.

 

No, he may not be on the field for the opening snap, but riddle me this, opening snap, the Bombers run a play with 6 receivers and an empty backfield. Now assuming (from the depth chart) that Ford is the 'starting tailback' but is not on the field for the 'opening snap', is he now, in your eyes, not a starter? Just because you're on not on the field for the first play doesn't mean you're not a 'starter'.

 

To me, all that O'Shea is saying is that if you're dressing for the game, you prepare for that game like you're a starter because I expect you to play like one if I need you. That's a big attitude shift and since neither you nor I have ever played Pro football, and O'Shea has, he could very well see his squad this way, and treat them this way. If I were the 42nd man, I can tell you personally I'd appreciate that kind of attitude from my coach very much. 

There are starters and there are backups on every team, the Bombers included.  The starters have earned the right to be called starters and the backups hope to earn that right.  The starters and the backups know who they are.  The opposing coaches know who they are.  Everyone who watches tonight's game will know who they are.  It's no big secret that the coach has to protect.

 

To me calling everyone starters is the same as giving everyone a participation ribbon in grade school.

 

 

Well last year Burke's attitude is he didn't have any starters lol. So far, personally, I like what O'Shea is doing. I like the seed he is planting in bomberville. But you need to remember, being in Edmonton, and (now) a die hard Oiler fan, I was sold on Dallas Eakins and what he was saying before the season started this year too, and we all know how the Oilers fared don't we? I'm not insinuating here that the Bombers will crap he bed like the Oilers did, far from it. I am saying that until the bullets start to fly none of really know what will transpire. I do know though that O'Shea is a breath of fresh air here. I like his demeanor, I like his attitude, I like how he handles the press. I like how he refuses to put undo pressure on any of his players by announcing them all as starters and thus holding all of them accountable. And don't forget any one of the 24 that take the field are one hit or mis step away from going on the DL - which means one of the remaining 18 on the sidelines will in fact, be a 'starter'. So his statement isn't actually innaccurate, just all encompassing. 

[Mike]

It's not about saying anything negative about O'Shea. He's simply doing what any good coach would do for the betterment of the team and despite nearly everyone telling you that, you're failing to recognize that fact. Any coach with a good grasp of team morale would have answered the question the exact same way.

 

I wouldn't say the exact same way. But it's certainly one good way to answer the question.

 

It's not a middle finger to the media either, despite TBurg wanting to spin it that way. And for the record, since you want to make that Mack comparison ... I've already had a few negative things to say about Mike O'Shea. This just isn't one of them.

[Mr Dee]

I'll defend my right to always say nice things about people…….…………….…but you're pushing it!

[Armchair GM]

Yeah... so Aaron Kelly's not fit to be our 5th receiver.  Wonder if he's been reading this board... monster game with some degree of difficulty catches too.

[BomberFan]

I'd take him over aaron kelly. 

You still feel that way today? LOL!

[BomberFan]

 

 

If they do sign Romby I will be so depressed with our ability to scout players.

The dude's done. Maybe he fits as some low snap count guy on a contender.

 

I've had many good steaks at the Keg.  If they serve me one that's over done, does that immediately make them a bad restaurant?

If the meat has been sitting there too long and they still serve it, I'd say yes, it does make them a bad restaurant.

 

Don't forget your steak is being cooked by a 20 year old who holds BBQ's in his moms back yard. LOL

[Floyd]

Its official... now where does he even fit?

 

 

CFL Official Feed        ✔ @CFL

THIS JUST IN: The @Wpg_BlueBombers have signed receiver Romby Bryant. #CFL

[BigBlue]

 

Its official... now where does he even fit?

 

 

CFL Official Feed        ✔ @CFL

THIS JUST IN: The @Wpg_BlueBombers have signed receiver Romby Bryant. #CFL

 

O Shea must have liked what h e saw of him in Toronto

 

 

I am not adverse to renting old pro's

[SPuDS]

Its official... now where does he even fit?

CFL Official Feed ✔ @CFL

THIS JUST IN: The @Wpg_BlueBombers have signed receiver Romby Bryant. #CFL

Insert sound of sideshow bob stepping on a rake..