TBURGESS

Good signing. Hopefully we can get a couple more signed before the end of the year.

Good signing.

I wouldn't pay big FA bucks to imports unless they are game changers. I'd target Holmes and Westerman.

Check out: ‘We have to make tough decisions,’ says B.C. Lions GM Buono of coach Benevides... There were plenty of questions, few concrete answers and now room for speculation as Lions head coach Mike Benevides and GM Wally Buono addressed reporters in the wake of Sunday’s disastrous B.C. Lions playoff loss to the Montreal Alouettes. It was time to “face the music,” said Buono. The future of Benevides and quarterback Travis Lulay, who has dealt with recurring right-shoulder problems in each of the last three seasons, is undecided.....

Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players. So you're being critical of Walters based on one draft then? Because if that's the case your argument is pretty weak, as usual, nevermind that it's incorrect since we drafted an o-lineman with our first pick in this past draft. What's your angle for your argument exactly? Critical of Walters? WTF? How the heck did you get that from what I've typed? Walters didn't go with the best available player or even the best available O lineman. He went with the best available center who was ranked 9th because that's our greatest need. I completely agree with Walters decision. Walters also said he'd draft an O lineman high and another one late in the draft. I agree with that too. Not sure what's so difficult for you to understand sport. You said we haven't been drafting by position, but by best player available (Which I have underlined and bolded for clairity purposes). My point was that we haven't been drafting the best players available (based on the consensus at the time of said drafts) as we selected Etienne and Pencer with some of our first round picks prior to 2014. You can include the Andy Mulumba pick in there as well. In the final rankings in each year Mulumba was ranked fifth, but picked second, Pencer who wasn't even in the final rankings in 2012, nor was he in the January ranking either, but he was picked third, and Jade Etienne who wasn't in the final rankings either, but was picked fourth. Again, your point as quoted was "we've been drafting the best available around these parts" which as I've indicated in my comments above, is completely incorrect on your part based on where they were ranked and when they were selected. You countered by saying those are players Mack thought were the best available. Perhaps, but we'll never know his logic into those selections - but it still goes against your main point because based on the rankings, and what was being said around the league at the time of those picks, the last things those players were was the best player available. Furthermore, you completely contradicted your comment saying "we've been drafting the best available around these parts" in your rebuttal to my post. You said we drafted Goossen who was ranked ninth - Congrats by the way, that's the only correct statement in either post you made that I've quoted. What you also said in that same post was that "He went with the best available centre...". Now forgive me if I'm wrong (and I'm not, so I'll save you the time) but last time I checked, I'm pretty sure centre is one of the 12 positions on the offensive side of the ball. You said in your first quoted statement that we've been drafting by BPA, and not by need at a position, yet you bring up 2014 and say we drafted based on our need at centre. Do you see the contradiction now in your statements since I've essentially spelled it out for you? With those out of the way, I brought up Walters because he's the only GM we've had draft in recent years aside from Mack. I'm not including Kelly/Murphy as that's too far back now considering when they were in charge. I'll restate my comment in my initial post - Given as we've very clearly not been drafting the BPA as I've indicated (yet you said we've been doing), and that we have in fact drafted by need at a position under Walters (which you said that we haven't, but later contradicted yourself in your rebuttal), what angle exactly are you trying to make in your argument? Listen sport. You said I was being critical of Walters, which is completely untrue. I never typed a word about Walters before you made your incorrect and ignorant statement. Mack drafted who he thought was best no matter what anyone else thought. His BPA's. Most of them turned out to be huge mistakes, but that's because Mack wasn't the smartest guy in the room like he thought he was. We didn't draft for need in any of the Mack drafts. It would have been hugely better for us to pick an O lineman at the top and one later on in every draft. By now, we'd have a good to great O line and could change to drafting the BPA. It would have been better to pick the consensus next best player too, but that's not what we did. We drafted the guys Mack thought were best. Period. Full stop. Kelly did the same thing. Chose the BPA as he saw it and it didn't work out. Walters drafted for need last year. It was the first time we've done that in years and about bloody time. I hope he does it again this year and again and again until we have an O line we can count on. This is not a flip flop. I'm simply agreeing with what Walters is doing and it's not drafting the BPA. I'll restate the obvious. We've been drafting the BPA as our GM 's see it for years. It gave us Muamba and pretty much nothing else. Walters and I agree that drafting for need is the better way to go. We'll see how it works out over the next few years.

Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players. So you're being critical of Walters based on one draft then? Because if that's the case your argument is pretty weak, as usual, nevermind that it's incorrect since we drafted an o-lineman with our first pick in this past draft. What's your angle for your argument exactly? Critical of Walters? WTF? How the heck did you get that from what I've typed? Walters didn't go with the best available player or even the best available O lineman. He went with the best available center who was ranked 9th because that's our greatest need. I completely agree with Walters decision. Walters also said he'd draft an O lineman high and another one late in the draft. I agree with that too.

The idea is to fix the O line first, because everything on offense starts at the O line.

None of those stats have anything to do with giving the ball away or lack of offensive production or having the defense on the field for 1:35 more than Calgary. They have to do with the other teams running the ball down our throats and our defense having no way to stop them. We were 2nd best against the pass partly because other teams didn't have to pass to beat us. No one's suggesting that there was only one factor that caused our losses. I'm just saying that the defense's play is part of the reason we lost and lost and lost.... There, you just admitted that's stats are baseless. And that's what I was pointing out. You can hang onto the ball longer by running, but you also can win the game quicker by passing. Stats are like laces that you can loop around and tie your shoes, but they're not necessary with loafers, where at least you can get some pennies. (huh) Stats only tell part of the story. That doesn't mean they are baseless. If you can beat a team by running, then that's what you do and that's what lots of teams did to us. Folks want it to be about fixing 1 thing and the other things don't really matter, but that's not the way football works. Stopping the run matters as does stopping the pass and stopping the big returns and being able to run and being able to pass and keeping your QB healthy and kicking FG's and everything else that goes into a football game. I'm referring to facts are baseless, (bolded) when one only uses them to tell a part of the story…like you did. You only quoted facts on the run..not on anything else. Now you are admitting that they are only part of the story. Then you go on to list everything else that is part of winning and losing football games, just like we've been pointing out, all along.(bolded) Stats are facts. Baseless means without foundation in fact. Therefore stats, by definition, aren't baseless. I never said stats tell the full story. I showed the stats that point out our defense is sub-standard, below average, and quite frankly, not good enough. You pointed out that they were above average against the pass, but that doesn't make the overall defense good enough. Can't rush the passer, stop the run or get themselves off the field = below average overall.

You sure did and I picked BC. Worst pick ever for me.

Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players.

You love to characterize folks who disagree with you as anti-Etch haters. I'm anti-losing and the reality is that Etch is a big part of the Bombers losing so often this year. In your fantasy world, Etch will suddenly become a better DC who suddenly produces an above average defense when he hasn't done it in the past. That's not likely to ever happen.

None of those stats have anything to do with giving the ball away or lack of offensive production or having the defense on the field for 1:35 more than Calgary. They have to do with the other teams running the ball down our throats and our defense having no way to stop them. We were 2nd best against the pass partly because other teams didn't have to pass to beat us. No one's suggesting that there was only one factor that caused our losses. I'm just saying that the defense's play is part of the reason we lost and lost and lost.... There, you just admitted that's stats are baseless. And that's what I was pointing out. You can hang onto the ball longer by running, but you also can win the game quicker by passing. Stats are like laces that you can loop around and tie your shoes, but they're not necessary with loafers, where at least you can get some pennies. (huh) Stats only tell part of the story. That doesn't mean they are baseless. If you can beat a team by running, then that's what you do and that's what lots of teams did to us. Folks want it to be about fixing 1 thing and the other things don't really matter, but that's not the way football works. Stopping the run matters as does stopping the pass and stopping the big returns and being able to run and being able to pass and keeping your QB healthy and kicking FG's and everything else that goes into a football game.

Lies. They stopped teams plenty only to have the offense send them right back on the field. No use in trying to help you see the truth. You've already made your mind up and nothing's going to change it.

None of those stats have anything to do with giving the ball away or lack of offensive production or having the defense on the field for 1:35 more than Calgary. They have to do with the other teams running the ball down our throats and our defense having no way to stop them. We were 2nd best against the pass partly because other teams didn't have to pass to beat us. No one's suggesting that there was only one factor that caused our losses. I'm just saying that the defense's play is part of the reason we lost and lost and lost....

Obviously, you haven't been following the Bombers drafts. We used 1 high draft pick on Pencer (Stupid pick) and 1 on Goosen (TBD) in the last 6 years. and a bunch taken in the later rounds like every team does, what's your damn point? The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players.

The offense wasn't any good, but the defense couldn't get itself off the field either and that was a big problem.

Obviously, you haven't been following the Bombers drafts. We used 1 high draft pick on Pencer (Stupid pick) and 1 on Goosen (TBD) in the last 6 years.

Our Defense was last or second last in: Rushing yards against Avg Rushing yards against per game # of rushes against Gain / rush Plays from scrimmage Net offense against Net yards / game Ints QB sacks None of those are hallmarks of a average defense, let alone a good one. We were 3rd last in Time Of Possession on offence. We had to defend for 38 seconds a game more than Hamilton and 1:35 more than Calgary. Neither of those teams use TOP as an excuse for their defenses.

I'm not talking about every draft and I don't think there's only one way to draft every year. I'm talking about this year. If we had 3 or 4 good starting O lineman, then drafting the best player regardless of position would make some sense. We don't so it doesn't. There are very few drafts that don't have some good O lineman in them. We get to pick #2, so we should get the 2nd best O lineman again this year. Assuming we choose correctly, and we haven't done that in the past, we get an upgrade to one of, if not THE worst, group we have.

Your post makes no sense. How do you get 7 good NI starters if you don't take the best player available (with consideration to availability around the NFL factored in)? Having a bunch of OL who might be ready to play in 2-3 years won't help us. Gotta draft and develop those mid-round guys into being players. How many 1st round picks on Calgary's OL or Saskatchewan's? We desperately need players who can play now regardless of position. Draft 1 OL with the first overall and pencil him in as a 2nd year starter. Draft 1 OL later in the draft and HOPE he will eventually turn into something down the line. Use the mid-rounds to bolster the rest of the NI roster. Gotta use your top picks to upgrade where you need to and for the Bombers, that's O lineman. That's how you end up with no top end Canadians. It's the Taman plan, look at the Riders roster, look at what he did here. They are SOL when Getzlaf and Foley are done. Might as well trade picks for good players if you aren't going to take the best player in the draft. It's actually how you end up with a top O line, which in turn makes life easier for your QB, RB, and receivers.

Your post makes no sense. How do you get 7 good NI starters if you don't take the best player available (with consideration to availability around the NFL factored in)? Having a bunch of OL who might be ready to play in 2-3 years won't help us. Gotta draft and develop those mid-round guys into being players. How many 1st round picks on Calgary's OL or Saskatchewan's? We desperately need players who can play now regardless of position. Draft 1 OL with the first overall and pencil him in as a 2nd year starter. Draft 1 OL later in the draft and HOPE he will eventually turn into something down the line. Use the mid-rounds to bolster the rest of the NI roster. Gotta use your top picks to upgrade where you need to and for the Bombers, that's O lineman.

I prefer experienced coaches, but I'd take Garcia for OC over MB any day of the week.

Horrible day for the Lions, but I don't think there will be major changes in BC in the off season. Benevides will keep his job. Not sure Khari keeps his. Washington put together a great defense for most of the season, so he keeps his job. I can see a bunch of players getting changed out though.

If/when we get to the point where we have 7 good NI starters, then we can afford to take the best player. Until then put me on the best O lineman, not best player side. Folks around here want the Bombers to pick Demski, who they consider the best player. They don't seem to understand that good teams a built from the lines out. We've had a bunch of GM's who followed the best player, in their minds, strategy and it's only worked once with Muamba. Meanwhile, we've had a poor O line for years.

Hate the 15 yard little push penalty after the play and it should have been offensive PI on the TD IMO. I guess the refs hate BC like they hate Wpg. Not the reason BC's losing though. BC's playing badly, led by Glenn's embarrassing bad play. (Note: I'm not one of the Glenn haters)