Wiecek Article: Pressure Mounts On And Off Field For MOS

[TBURGESS]

11 hours ago, Atomic said:

And as we all know, stats are the only thing that matters.  Especially for a first year Canadian playing exclusively special teams.  They might as well just cut him now, another failed project.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think he's a bust or a star. If he played all 18 games and only had 7 SP tackles, then he's not a solid special teamer. It's that simple.

[sweep the leg]

I thought the swipe about stats was directed at TBurg, not Iso...

[Mike]

13 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think he's a bust or a star. If he played all 18 games and only had 7 SP tackles, then he's not a solid special teamer. It's that simple.

... except it's not.

[Bigblue204]

13 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think he's a bust or a star. If he played all 18 games and only had 7 SP tackles, then he's not a solid special teamer. It's that simple.

No it is not that simple. like has been explained before, not everyone on the field is responsible for making a tackle.

[Taynted_Fayth]

his stats are irrelevant to me especially for year 1,  but what should we realistically expect from him in year 2 before we start forming an opinion on how this pick turned out

[sweep the leg]

18 hours ago, Noeller said:

I think I actually heard Walters snort from all the way here in Alberta. The amount of time and effort that goes into research on every single player in the draft would blow your mind......just ask Rids.

Never mind asking Rids, common sense should help everybody come to that conclusion.

[Bigblue204]

Just now, Taynted_Fayth said:

his stats are irrelevant to me especially for year 1,  but what should we realistically expect from him in year 2 before we start forming an opinion on how this pick turned out

Well we used our first pick. So I would hope to see some significant time on Defence from him this year. Not going to say starting...though that would be nice. But if he can get some game time in at safety I think that would be a good sign. Heard from a few people that think he is ready to start, but I'll wait until TC to make that jump.

[Atomic]

21 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

That's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think he's a bust or a star. If he played all 18 games and only had 7 SP tackles, then he's not a solid special teamer. It's that simple.

Erroneous!!!!

[TBURGESS]

The Hurl defense. He's filling a hole, he's not supposed to make tackles, but he's really good even tho the stats don't show it. 

Edited March 29, 2016 by TBURGESS

[Mike]

2 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

The Hurl defense. He's filling a hole, he's not supposed to make tackles, but he's really good even tho the stats don't show it. 

I never said he's really good. I never suggested anything about his abilities whatsoever, but as was predicted, you're just going to completely ignore everything thrown at you as far as actual football discussion.

What's the point of discussing football if you don't want to actually discuss football? You're just going in circles complaining.

[sweep the leg]

1 minute ago, Bigblue204 said:

Well we used our first pick. So I would hope to see some significant time on Defence from him this year. Not going to say starting...though that would be nice. But if he can get some game time in at safety I think that would be a good sign. Heard from a few people that think he is ready to start, but I'll wait until TC to make that jump.

That's how I see it. I don't expect him to start, but I want to see him on the field fairly regularly.

[sweep the leg]

Edited: Picture was bigger than I expected.

Edited March 29, 2016 by sweep the leg

[Bigblue204]

19 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

The Hurl defense. He's filling a hole, he's not supposed to make tackles, but he's really good even tho the stats don't show it. 

better than the, "He's not doing what I think he should be doing, so he must be total garbage." argument.

 

[TBURGESS]

5 minutes ago, Mike said:

I never said he's really good. I never suggested anything about his abilities whatsoever, but as was predicted, you're just going to completely ignore everything thrown at you as far as actual football discussion.

What's the point of discussing football if you don't want to actually discuss football? You're just going in circles complaining.

Recap: The original poster called him a 'Solid Special Teamer'. I disagreed with that statement and provided tackle stats to back up my opinion. I was told that the stats were wrong on the CFL site (Which is possible) and that Waggoner had played every game. That made Waggoners stats even worse IMO. You jumped in and said his job wasn't to make tackles, but to take up the man opposite him, which I called the Hurl defence. That's not going in circles complaining. 

3 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

better than the, "He's not doing what I think he should be doing, so he must be total garbage." argument.

 

I never called him total garbage. I simply said that he wasn't a 'Solid Special Teamer'. Way to overreach.

The whole argument boils down to the word "Solid". Folks around here think it means "Average". I think it means more.

[Mike]

Calling it the Hurl defense is insinuating it's a defensive statement I made, when in reality it's just the truth. If you're going to sit here and try to argue with me that every guy on special teams coverage is assigned the same job (to make the tackle), that's narrow minded and unintelligent. Waggoner didn't play a position on teams that was primarily responsible for tackling the ball carrier. It's not an opinion, it's not a defense, it's a fact. Your inability to want to address it and simply throw out terms like "the Hurl defense" really doesn't contribute anything.

[Bigblue204]

9 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Recap: The original poster called him a 'Solid Special Teamer'. I disagreed with that statement and provided tackle stats to back up my opinion. I was told that the stats were wrong on the CFL site (Which is possible) and that Waggoner had played every game. That made Waggoners stats even worse IMO. You jumped in and said his job wasn't to make tackles, but to take up the man opposite him, which I called the Hurl defence. That's not going in circles complaining. 

I never called him total garbage. I simply said that he wasn't a 'Solid Special Teamer'. Way to overreach.

The whole argument boils down to the word "Solid". Folks around here think it means "Average". I think it means more.

You're argument was based on stats. Which do play an important part in showing a players worth on the field. But do not tell the entire story. As some players don't get the "Stats" due to the job they are supposed to do on the field. Just like Goosen isn't going to be racking up the rushing yards this year, but he will still play a vital role in that department. Or if you take a look at Wilds punting average, it's fairly bad, but he still plays a role on that team, just doesn't collect that particular stat.

So by making an argument on some ones ability based solely on a single stat line, you are over looking the position they play and the purpose they fill while on the field.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Bigblue204

[TBURGESS]

39 minutes ago, Mike said:

Calling it the Hurl defense is insinuating it's a defensive statement I made, when in reality it's just the truth. If you're going to sit here and try to argue with me that every guy on special teams coverage is assigned the same job (to make the tackle), that's narrow minded and unintelligent. Waggoner didn't play a position on teams that was primarily responsible for tackling the ball carrier. It's not an opinion, it's not a defense, it's a fact. Your inability to want to address it and simply throw out terms like "the Hurl defense" really doesn't contribute anything.

I never said or implied that every guy on special teams coverage is assigned the same job. I never said or implied that tackle stats are the one and only way to determine worth. Both are bogus arguments.

Coaches give players jobs they can handle. In Hurls case, that's to simply fill a hole. In Waggoners case it's a 'position that isn't primarily responsible for tackling the ball carrier' (Your words, not mine). That's the connection I was trying to make, but was lost in translation. 

[Mr Dee]

TB - Looks to me that you've changed tracks..went out of your area of responsibility..failed to make either the tackle or strayed out of your lane... You need more coaching..

[Mike]

18 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I never said or implied that every guy on special teams coverage is assigned the same job. I never said or implied that tackle stats are the one and only way to determine worth. Both are bogus arguments.

Coaches give players jobs they can handle. In Hurls case, that's to simply fill a hole. In Waggoners case it's a 'position that isn't primarily responsible for tackling the ball carrier' (Your words, not mine). That's the connection I was trying to make, but was lost in translation. 

That's not what you meant and we both know it.

[TBURGESS]

12 minutes ago, Mike said:

That's not what you meant and we both know it.

Actually it is what I said and what I meant.

17 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

TB - Looks to me that you've changed tracks..went out of your area of responsibility..failed to make either the tackle or strayed out of your lane... You need more coaching..

The number of tackles on special teams means something whether anyone wants to admit it or not. 

Waggoner showed up about half a dozen to a dozen times on the TSN game feeds last year and most of those were his tackles. I was wondering where he was for much of the season. You can infer his assignment from where he lines up but unless you have access to the wide angle 'tape', can follow Waggoner down the field on every play, and cross reference that to his assignment, you have little to no idea if he's playing well or badly or if he's doing what they expect of him. I doubt anyone on these forums has done that, so how do you form an opinion of his play? His only stat is 7 tackles or about 1 tackle a month. That's all we have IMO.

[Mr Dee]

One of the most important non-stats that aren't/can't br recorded would be the assists in tackles made on STs BECAUSE a special teamer held his lane and forced the play as was drawn up. If you've done your job..it will be noticed.

[TBURGESS]

3 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

One of the most important non-stats that aren't/can't br recorded would be the assists in tackles made on STs BECAUSE a special teamer held his lane and forced the play as was drawn up. If you've done your job..it will be noticed.

That's a true statement, how do you know it applies to Waggoner?

[Fatty Liver]

28 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

One of the most important non-stats that aren't/can't br recorded would be the assists in tackles made on STs BECAUSE a special teamer held his lane and forced the play as was drawn up. If you've done your job..it will be noticed.

Also if ball carrier runs into his lane, much higher chance he makes a tackle.  If he's free-lancing on ST to increase his tackle stats he's not doing his job properly despite the numbers.

[Mike]

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

Actually it is what I said and what I meant.

The number of tackles on special teams means something whether anyone wants to admit it or not. 

Waggoner showed up about half a dozen to a dozen times on the TSN game feeds last year and most of those were his tackles. I was wondering where he was for much of the season. You can infer his assignment from where he lines up but unless you have access to the wide angle 'tape', can follow Waggoner down the field on every play, and cross reference that to his assignment, you have little to no idea if he's playing well or badly or if he's doing what they expect of him. I doubt anyone on these forums has done that, so how do you form an opinion of his play? His only stat is 7 tackles or about 1 tackle a month. That's all we have IMO.

So if, in your estimation, we have very little to go off in forming an opinion, why did you choose to form such a strong one based on that limited information?

[TBURGESS]

8 minutes ago, Mike said:

So if, in your estimation, we have very little to go off in forming an opinion, why did you choose to form such a strong one based on that limited information?

I disagree with calling him a Strong Special Team player. How on earth do you call that a strong opinion? It's not like I called him garbage or said he wasn't doing his job or even said that he was a bad 2nd overall pick. Those would strong opinions. BTW: How did you base your opinion on him?