17to85 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 The issue if they are looking to trade the guy is that you make a deal to acquire him and sign him to a contract touting the fact that you don't care that he's slowing down you want his leadership... and then ship him out before he plays a game for you... how do future free agents react to offers from a front office that is ruthless like that? I mean it makes sense if Banks has no job here, but the optics can be as damaging as anything.
JuranBoldenRules Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 The issue if they are looking to trade the guy is that you make a deal to acquire him and sign him to a contract touting the fact that you don't care that he's slowing down you want his leadership... and then ship him out before he plays a game for you... how do future free agents react to offers from a front office that is ruthless like that? I mean it makes sense if Banks has no job here, but the optics can be as damaging as anything. Meh, it's football, it is ruthless. I think most players would rather play for a team that puts the guys on the field who most deserve it.
Jpan85 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 If they do move on shows Walters does not get emotionally invested in players can accept he made a mistake and can move on quickly. Something that had not happened here in awhile. Mr Dee 1
Mr Dee Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 There's such a thing as trying something on for size and finding that what you think you wanted, doesn't quite fit the way you thought. That doesn't mean the article may not address somebody else's needs…maybe even for retro-wear.
Captain Blue Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 Play the best players we have. Despite the potential image damage to the franchise (which I don't think is a big deal), players will be happy that the best players get on the field. After all, the best sales pitch we can do for future free agents is show that we are building a consistent, winning team. Still, if they trade him, I would bet something comes out later that we don't know now. There has to be more to it. Even if he's not starting, you'd think they would keep him around for depth once injuries hit in the long season. Something just doesn't add up right now.
Jpan85 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 The guys in the secondary are not going to complain when potential competition is removed from the equation.
Brandon Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 I don't think it's a locker room issue.... by the reports from camp and pre-season most critics think the guy was not shining and did not show much. *If* he is traded it's because he didn't crack the line up. I don't think future free agents will really care about this situation.... the other guys like Willy, Randle and Moore are playing and having no issues after signing a contract. I wouldn't compare this to the Lefors situation where Kelly was a moron and because of his faults he wanted Lefors to take a massive pay cut because the Kelly offense wasn't clicking.
Floyd Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 KW really should buy Mack lunch... any other GM would be crucified for wasting $50k on a 34 year old DB and then losing control of trade rumours before the guy has played a game On the other hand. Mack should buy Mike Kelly a car...
Fatty Liver Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 If Walters has to eat crow and move on Banks this is a very good moment in time for him to do so.
kelownabomberfan Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 I think it's a sign of management integrity if we cut bait on Banks now and just man up and admit it was a bad move. No GM is perfect. Banks just got flat out out-played by younger guys who wanted it more. Maybe he thought he could just show up and be given a job. Who knows. All I know is that with this regime, it appears that the best guys get to play, which is so different from the Mack years when the coaches were forced to play guys just so that the GM didn't look bad. And we know how that went. What I'd like to see is a National DL show up in camp ASAP, and hopefully another National receiver as well. Watson is good but this constant injury thing is getting tiring.
Floyd Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 Wonder if Banks' 'vet day whatever that is...' in training camp had anything to do with this...
Noeller Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 Darrin Bauming @DarrinBauming 1m Through my eyes, you could see Korey Banks falling out of favour with the #Bombers. And now a report surfaces he is on the trade block. Darrin Bauming @DarrinBauming 35s From what I saw through training camp and practice daily, I didn't have Korey Banks in my starting lineup. That's MY starters. Not #Bombers' Darrin Bauming @DarrinBauming 3m "He took a vet-day. Whatever that is." Mike O'Shea said unimpressed when Banks took a partial day off early in #Bombers training camp. Darrin Bauming @DarrinBauming 2m That comment stuck in my head like glue.
Y2C Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 The issue if they are looking to trade the guy is that you make a deal to acquire him and sign him to a contract touting the fact that you don't care that he's slowing down you want his leadership... and then ship him out before he plays a game for you... how do future free agents react to offers from a front office that is ruthless like that? I mean it makes sense if Banks has no job here, but the optics can be as damaging as anything. So, we should go with the "stick with veteran players based on past performance in spite of having better (or at the very least cheaper) options" route? Been there, done that. Didn't lead to any more or less interest from free agents. Fact of the matter is the vast majority of the time the best available players are going wherever the most money is coming from. Best chance beyond that is being a perennial championship contender. The Patriots are a good example of this. Not afraid to show a veteran the door, even after playing well, in favour of a younger, cheaper option so long as the drop off won't be dramatic. I get that we just brought him in in the offseason, but we were the worst team in the league last year. It appears we've managed to acquire a group of players younger, cheaper, and just as good if not better than Banks. Better to cut losses and go with the best team we can field than showhorn in Banks based on how good he was in the past.
17to85 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 So, we should go with the "stick with veteran players based on past performance in spite of having better (or at the very least cheaper) options" route? How about you do your due diligence before you give up an asset and throw a pile of cash at the guy? We have scouts on staff who are supposed to be on the ball about this stuff right? I can't help but think if the last couple GMs had been here to do this the reaction here would be decidedly more negative, and if we weren't still enjoying a big big win the reaction would be more sour as well. I generally like Kyle Walters, but let's call a spade a spade, the Banks move which they crowed pretty loudly about is a bust of a move.
sweep the leg Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 I generally like Kyle Walters, but let's call a spade a spade, the Banks move which they crowed pretty loudly about is a bust of a move. Not yet it isn't, but it certainly looks to be heading in that direction.
Y2C Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 So, we should go with the "stick with veteran players based on past performance in spite of having better (or at the very least cheaper) options" route? How about you do your due diligence before you give up an asset and throw a pile of cash at the guy? We have scouts on staff who are supposed to be on the ball about this stuff right? I can't help but think if the last couple GMs had been here to do this the reaction here would be decidedly more negative, and if we weren't still enjoying a big big win the reaction would be more sour as well. I generally like Kyle Walters, but let's call a spade a spade, the Banks move which they crowed pretty loudly about is a bust of a move. It looks that way at the moment, but to be fair Banks hasn't played a down in an actual game in a Bomber jersey, and all we are going by is hearsay as far as "attitude issues" off the field/him thumbing his nose at a reduced role. These things are certainly plausable, but nothing has directly proved it besides O'shea's subtle, but not subtle, dig at him for "taking a veteran day, whatever that is." Add in that the Bombers are shopping him, but there's no way to know the exact reason the team is doing so. At the end of the day though, whether or not it was a botched decision, if the team as a whole is better off with someone else on the roster than it is with him that's what I want to see happen. I'm glad that management is willing to do just that reguardless of it looking bad because we gave up an asset and $50,000 to get him.
Tracker Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 There have been broad hints that both Brandon Stewart and Jovon Johnson had attitude problems last year which didn't help the team culture at all. Having gotten rid of those two problems, Walters and O'Shea were probably very loathe to bring another prima donna on board.
TBURGESS Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 I don't have any problems with replacing Banks if he's being out played by younger/cheaper players. In fact that's the way I think a team should be run. I do have a problem with giving him a $50K bonus, a raise and paying the CBA bonus then losing the investment before he plays a single game. If Mack or Kelly or Taman did this, they'd be raked over the coals, but because it's Walters, it's an astute move. Quite frankly, Banks has zero trade value. Wally said there weren't many takers when he was being shipped out of BC so he took Kito as that's all he could get. DR. CFL 1
Floyd Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 There have been broad hints that both Brandon Stewart and Jovon Johnson had attitude problems last year which didn't help the team culture at all. Having gotten rid of those two problems, Walters and O'Shea were probably very loathe to bring another prima donna on board. I'm sorry but JJ did everything this organization asked him to do and never complained publicly, ever. I think there were huge 'attitude' problems last year... once the coach visibly quit on the team and the GM vanished.
Mr. Perfect Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 The thing to take away from all of this, and it's actually quite a good thing: the best players will play. Period. It doesn't matter your contract, how you were acquired or why. If someone is better than you, you'll be on the bench or be given your apple and road map. It's quite refreshing. blitzmore, Blue-urns, Goalie and 1 other 4
gbill2004 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 @DarrinBauming: Mike O'Shea says Korey Banks is still injured. Back. Out of the lineup this week. #Bombers
gbill2004 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 @PentonKirk: Mike O'Shea said LB Korey Banks has a future with the #Bombers "as of right now." That's also known as the kiss of death.
Mr Dee Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 I do have a problem with giving him a $50K bonus, a raise and paying the CBA bonus then losing the investment before he plays a single game. If Mack or Kelly or Taman did this, they'd be raked over the coals, but because it's Walters, it's an astute move. You're mixing the message again. The bonus was part of the signing. In fact, I don't even remember the bonus. Acquiring an veteran asset, at that time, was seen as a good move. That was one transaction. Now, that asset is viewed in a different light and they're trying to make a move on him. Separate transaction. If successful with a trade, good. If not, cut him, move on, part of football. It's part of Walter's term and has nothing to do with previous regimes. As 'tute' moves go, nobody's blowing Walter's horn more than is warranted. I just see that this current GM is working to provide his HC with the best possible roster, and if he makes mistakes along the way…so be it. Blue-urns and blitzmore 2
Jacquie Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 Why is everyone accepting this rumour as fact? Have the bombers denied the rumour? Did I miss something? O'Shea has denied it now. I'm getting a chuckle about how personally Jacquie seems to be taking this.... I'm getting a chuckle that you think not blindly believing a rumour put out by the media means I'm taking it personally.
gbill2004 Posted June 28, 2014 Report Posted June 28, 2014 Not every move is going to be a homerun. Cut your losses and move on... OldSchoolBlue 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now