TBURGESS
-
Posts
5,044 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by TBURGESS
-
-
The good news is that Marve is playing well. Accuracy is one of the top indicators of a good QB IMHO. The bad news is that Willy wasn't the best QB at mini camp because he will be our starter. Willy has a whole TC to work things out and I expect him to be the starter at least for the first half of the season. If Marve is pushing Willy and showing more in practice and we aren't winning, then I don't see any reason he wouldn't get a chance to show it in a real game, but that's a lot of AND's and a long time from now.
-
It's your opinion that Miller handled it correctly.
No one else is fingering Miller because they either didn't talk to MIller directly (My best guess), or Miller told them it was off the record, or they don't have the guts to name Miller.
It's not blackmail. No one said 'Show me or else', your just making up stuff now.
You can't play schoolyard-flip-the-phrase on me on this one because I have not stated how Miller handled it one way or the other.
Where my opinion does comes in is related to how Friesen handled, then wrote his article.
Pretty evident to me he didn't get his way and so he took it out on Miller.
YourYou're the one in denial.Pretty evident that you've made up your mind and what you opinion is. No use in pretending you don't think that Miller was right and Friesen was wrong.
The article was going to be written no matter what Miller did. His actions guaranteed that it would not be a flattering article. You want to blame Friesen for that. If Miller chose a different route and allowed the press in, then there was at least a chance that the article wouldn't be so negative against the Bombers and a zero percent chance that the article would be negative towards Miller. That's why I think it was the wrong way to handle the situation. It annoys me when the Bombers get bad press that they could have avoided and this is one of those times.
It's not just Friesen who's following the story, nor is it just Friesen who wants to be let in to see the damage. It's not just the media who think they should be let in. The mayor and tons of comments in the press. I'd guess that a poll in the papers, not on the Bomber fan sites, would show that most people want to see what's going on and that most feel they have a right to know. The major difference between most folks and Friesen is that Friesen can write about it.
I don't usually argue with folks who hate Friesen because I don't particularly like his writing style, and I know he does it to get rise out of folks. That's one way to keep your job in a dying industry I guess. In this case however, the Friesen hate is misplaced.
I'm not in denial. I disagree with your opinion. Two very different things.
-
There is no way that Friesen could have written the story he did if Miller handled the situation correctly and let the media in to see the damage. Friesen's expected negativity would have had to go somewhere else like the folks who are actually at fault.
It is only your opinion and Friesen's spin that Miller handled it incorrectly.
Nobody else is fingering Miller..why is that?
It's a crock if you think that Miller should have given in to blackmail…."show me or else."
It's your opinion that Miller handled it correctly.
No one else is fingering Miller because they either didn't talk to MIller directly (My best guess), or Miller told them it was off the record, or they don't have the guts to name Miller.
It's not blackmail. No one said 'Show me or else', your just making up stuff now.
-
I'm not blaming Friesen for the story.
I'm blaming Friesen for his whiny entitled attitude that goes along with his version of this story.
As this post actually explains the topic of coversation and doesn't fit with the idea that tburgess has in his head expect it to be completely ignored. Never have I seen someone so consistently miss the entire point of why people say what they say.
I'm not missing the point. I disagree with the popular opinion that this is in any way Friesen's fault. You're not missing the points I'm making either, you're disagreeing with them. Sort of the point of discussion don't you think?
There is no way that Friesen could have written the story he did if Miller handled the situation correctly and let the media in to see the damage. Friesen's expected negativity would have had to go somewhere else like the folks who are actually at fault.
People read the stories think of the worse case scenario, like the Saddledome, when they hear about water damage. I'm sure it's no where near that bad, so pictures would help the situation rather than hamper it. Not likely to happen now, because that would be Miller giving in to the Media.
-
How have the Bombers shown disdain to the media since Miller, Walters et al have been in charge. They've held more press conferences since December than I think Mack had in his entire tenure as GM. They have been more accessible than previous regimes.
They did things right until this story. They also got good press until this story.
Which shows that Friesen will crap on the Bombers no matter how much goodwill they build with the media.
It actually shows that the media will give good press when the Bombers do the right thing and bad press when they don't, which is the way it's always been and always will be.
Folks around here want to blame Friesen every time he prints a negative story about the Bombers. It's far easier to blame him than it is to discuss the valid problems he brings up.
Our stadium is leaking... blame Friesen. Nope, blame the architects / builders instead.
Our management won't let the media in to report the damage? Blame Friesen. Nope, blame our management/media folks instead.
-
How have the Bombers shown disdain to the media since Miller, Walters et al have been in charge. They've held more press conferences since December than I think Mack had in his entire tenure as GM. They have been more accessible than previous regimes.
They did things right until this story. They also got good press until this story.
-
Then don't complain about negative articles because they are a byproduct of the way the Bombers treat the media. You can't have it both ways.
You've got it backwards. Friesen has always been the way he is, that's not a result of the way the team has treated the media just the way Friesen tries to stay relevant in a world that needs newspapers and self entitled columnists less and less. I complain because Friesen is **** at his job, if he doesn't want to do the job well then I am all in favour of the team not giving him anything. He's got to earn it.
Nope, you've got it backwards. When Taman was around it was a 'Love In' with the media because he fed them info and bent over backwards to help them out in every way he could. Since Kelly, The Bombers have treated the press with disdain. The result should be obvious to everyone. Try to put the media in their place and the articles they write will have a negative slant. It's the way the media has always worked and the way it will continue to work whether you like it or not. If they like you, they will show more respect and write more positive articles.
You, and others, gripe about every article Friesen writes. You don't like the guy so you treat him with disdain and spew negative comments. It's funny because you're actually upset with him for doing the same thing that you do. Is it because he has a bigger audience or that he gets paid?
- DR. CFL and Nasty Nate
-
2
-
I find it very unlikely Ted Laurent would sign here. I am interested in the situations of Alex Hall & Keron Williams though.
Why do you find it unlikely that Laurent would sign with us? We need an NI starter on defense to replace Muamba and we should have extra money to be able to offer him a better salary than BC or Montreal, although they would give him a better chance to be a winner. Edmonton isn't much better than we are so they would have to compete on price with us. At the very least, we should be able to push Laurents salary up.
-
The story was going to get written last night no matter what. By not letting reporters in to see the damage, Miller guaranteed that it was going to be aa negative story about the Bombers.
It's Paul Friesen, it was always going to be a negative story about the Bombers even if Wade Miller gave him a handy to go along with the tour. That's Friesens entire schtick, be as negative as possible. He's just a bad troll trying to get people worked up.
The idea is to channel Friesen's negativity towards the builders and/or architects where it belongs, instead of towards the Bombers.
The only thing the Bombers may have done wrong is hire the wrong architect or builder or both. When you're having something built, you leave it up to the professionals to handle how water is controlled. I doubt there is a single person on the Bombers staff who has the credentials to do it. You have to trust the professionals you hire to do their job. If they don't do it properly, you expect them to fix their mistakes. That's what the story should be right now. "Bombers get screwed by the architect/builders" or "Taxpayers get screwed by the architect/builders" or even "Who screwed up the new stadium?" complete with pictures of the destruction and discussion of who's fault it is.
Yeah cause Friesen is always fair and balanced right? Guy was going to crap on the Bombers regardless because that's what he always does. I approve of Miller telling him to piss off.
Of course you approve. You liked the way Kelly handled the media too.
It was one of the few things he did right. Joe Mack had the same attitude and I approved of that as well. The media wants to act like entitled brats I wouldn't give them anything either. The brand is strong they don't need the media to pump their tires they just have to put a winning product on the field.
Then don't complain about negative articles because they are a byproduct of the way the Bombers treat the media. You can't have it both ways.
-
The story was going to get written last night no matter what. By not letting reporters in to see the damage, Miller guaranteed that it was going to be aa negative story about the Bombers.
It's Paul Friesen, it was always going to be a negative story about the Bombers even if Wade Miller gave him a handy to go along with the tour. That's Friesens entire schtick, be as negative as possible. He's just a bad troll trying to get people worked up.
The idea is to channel Friesen's negativity towards the builders and/or architects where it belongs, instead of towards the Bombers.
The only thing the Bombers may have done wrong is hire the wrong architect or builder or both. When you're having something built, you leave it up to the professionals to handle how water is controlled. I doubt there is a single person on the Bombers staff who has the credentials to do it. You have to trust the professionals you hire to do their job. If they don't do it properly, you expect them to fix their mistakes. That's what the story should be right now. "Bombers get screwed by the architect/builders" or "Taxpayers get screwed by the architect/builders" or even "Who screwed up the new stadium?" complete with pictures of the destruction and discussion of who's fault it is.
Yeah cause Friesen is always fair and balanced right? Guy was going to crap on the Bombers regardless because that's what he always does. I approve of Miller telling him to piss off.
Of course you approve. You liked the way Kelly handled the media too.
-
The story was going to get written last night no matter what. By not letting reporters in to see the damage, Miller guaranteed that it was going to be aa negative story about the Bombers.
It's Paul Friesen, it was always going to be a negative story about the Bombers even if Wade Miller gave him a handy to go along with the tour. That's Friesens entire schtick, be as negative as possible. He's just a bad troll trying to get people worked up.
The idea is to channel Friesen's negativity towards the builders and/or architects where it belongs, instead of towards the Bombers.
The only thing the Bombers may have done wrong is hire the wrong architect or builder or both. When you're having something built, you leave it up to the professionals to handle how water is controlled. I doubt there is a single person on the Bombers staff who has the credentials to do it. You have to trust the professionals you hire to do their job. If they don't do it properly, you expect them to fix their mistakes. That's what the story should be right now. "Bombers get screwed by the architect/builders" or "Taxpayers get screwed by the architect/builders" or even "Who screwed up the new stadium?" complete with pictures of the destruction and discussion of who's fault it is.
-
There's no validity to keeping people out until fault has been determined. That could take months if not years depending on how much it costs to fix.
The story was going to get written last night no matter what. By not letting reporters in to see the damage, Miller guaranteed that it was going to be aa negative story about the Bombers. A decent media person would have spun a different story. Something along the lines of... "We don't know who's fault it is that we have water ingress in our great new building, but we are going to get to the bottom of it and have the culprits pay for fixing it. In the meantime, come on over and see for yourselves. Take some pictures, but don't touch anything." You've then got a better chance of the story being about bad contractors or bad design and the Bombers become the injured party, which BTW, they are.
-
I laugh at those who blame Friesen. He didn't pour water in the suites. He didn't make snow melt. He didn't design or build the stadium. He didn't deny access to a big news story. All he did was ask to see the damage that he'd been told about. Simple request so he could write his story. Handled wrong by the Bombers. When will the Bombers learn that you either work with the media or get burnt by it?
- iso_55, DR. CFL and BlueGoldBozo
-
3
-
I guess BC isn't in the Glenn sweepstakes anymore.
-
I think Elliott is better than Hall, but I don't see any reason to bring him back. I'm hoping we bring in some better QB's so we don't even need Hall any more.
-
My picks for stock up / stock down this weekend ...
Stock up ...
DB Derek Jones - fast 40 yard time and he performed well in the one on ones. Teams wanted to see him line up against CIS guys coming from a NCAA school and he held his own
DL Quinn Smith - dominant against the OL in drills, he won every single snap he took. Stock goes way up.
LB Jesse Briggs - stood out as a mostly unknown against a strong LB group, very impressive testing numbers
Stock down ...
DB? Adam Thibault - fastest in the 40 but he's a guy without a defined position and he got hurt before scouts had a chance to try and give him one
LB Max Caron - speed was a concern coming into this weekend and he tested poorly.
REC Kris Bastien - came in as arguably the #2 receiver behind Devon Bailey and failed to seperate himself from the pack
Is there anywhere I can watch the one on one's?
-
That decision was a bad one considering the Bombers are trying to get that second round pick from what I've read. Now they'll have to give another asset up to get it.
Not really. We traded our 2nd rounder for a position of need (OL). If we can now obtain a similar 2nd round pick in exchange for a position of strength, for example a NI DB like Cauchy, that would be a very shrewd move by Walters.
Cauchy isn't going to get a 2nd rounder and safety isn't a position of strength.
-
I grew up in River Heights, and BDI is/was my go to place for Goog Specials.
-
@PentonKirk: The #CFL has approved the use of video replay on pass interference. Board of governors needs to approve.
I hope that Board Of Governors vitos it. Dumbest rule change in years IMHO.
- voodoochylde and Blue-urns
-
2
-
Best pizza in Winnipeg IMHO is at Mona Lisa's on Corydon. I make a point of having one every time I come to town.
-
-
All this talk of bringing Glenn in only if he's a backup makes me laugh. Willy is our starting QB right now. If we bring Glenn in, that's likely to change because Glenn is a better QB right now than Willy is. You need to start your best players, not have them sit on the bench 'coaching' a young guy. We already have a QB coach for that with Buck to back him up.
Right now we are at the same place we were when Kelly was coaching. We got another teams inexperienced backup QB and named him as our starting QB. As every year since we fired Glenn shows us, the chances of that working out are pretty slim. What makes everyone think this years inexperienced QB is the one we have been looking for but haven't found for the last decade?
So Calgary goes and gives the league a successful example of elevating a young starter with upside, and teaming him with an experienced, good-but-not-great backup... and TBurgess from the confines of his cozy British Columbia abode thinks that it is laughable to suggest that might work in Winnipeg?
Calgary's been arguably the most successful team in the CFL since signing Kevin Glenn as its experienced, good-but-not-great, backup quarterback. Why wouldn't we try it, if the price were right?
Let me ask the question again. What makes folks think that Willy is the QB we have been looking for, because I don't see it. I could see it if we were talking about Reilly, Collaros or Smith, but Willy?
Even from the 'Best Coast' I can see that what makes sense in Calgary, doesn't necessarily make sense in Winnipeg. Calgary has Tate who is good enough to start when he isn't injured and BLM who most think is the next big thing, so Glenn in a backup role makes sense. We have Willy with 2(?) starts behind a significantly better O line than we have and Hall, our most experienced QB who no one is saying is going to be the next big thing, so Glenn in a backup role doesn't make sense to me.
.
-
All this talk of bringing Glenn in only if he's a backup makes me laugh. Willy is our starting QB right now. If we bring Glenn in, that's likely to change because Glenn is a better QB right now than Willy is. You need to start your best players, not have them sit on the bench 'coaching' a young guy. We already have a QB coach for that with Buck to back him up.
Right now we are at the same place we were when Kelly was coaching. We got another teams inexperienced backup QB and named him as our starting QB. As every year since we fired Glenn shows us, the chances of that working out are pretty slim. What makes everyone think this years inexperienced QB is the one we have been looking for but haven't found for the last decade?
Its called veteran insurance in case plan A doesn't work out.
Your plan has failed us the last three years...we can't suffer any more poor qb play when this team doesn't have the talent to overcome this.
My plan didn't fail us. Mack's plan did. Don't you remember any of Jyles, Brink, Elliott, Goltz, Hall and others? Buck was the only experienced QB we had and he wasn't able to stay healthy enough to play. The rest are 'coulda woulda been's'. BTW: For the record, like a lot of others, I thought we should have kept Elliott and gotten rid of Buck in the last off season and I wished we'd have traded for Glenn.
-
All this talk of bringing Glenn in only if he's a backup makes me laugh. Willy is our starting QB right now. If we bring Glenn in, that's likely to change because Glenn is a better QB right now than Willy is. You need to start your best players, not have them sit on the bench 'coaching' a young guy. We already have a QB coach for that with Buck to back him up.
Right now we are at the same place we were when Kelly was coaching. We got another teams inexperienced backup QB and named him as our starting QB. As every year since we fired Glenn shows us, the chances of that working out are pretty slim. What makes everyone think this years inexperienced QB is the one we have been looking for but haven't found for the last decade?
Expectations for 2014
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
Pretty early, but I'll take a shot.
Calgary lost Glenn, but not too much else. I expect them to be #1 in the West this year.
Regina lost the most in the offseason, but they were so far ahead of us that it won't really matter to us.
BC lost the second most in the offseason, but they are also way ahead of us. I see Regina and BC battling for 2nd and 3rd for the whole season.
Edmonton is at least a year ahead of us in the QB dept and they made changes to try and fix their O line, so I expect they will be ahead of us in offense. I like Chris Jones as a DC, but HC/DC could be a problem. Still, I see them ahead of us on defense, so I'll pick them as 4th.
We've got big ? at QB, O line, and OC at the very least, so I don't see us as an offensive team. I hate Etch as DC, but I expect we will look better on D for the first half of the season. We'll probably have the most changes of any CFL team this year not called the redblacks and that's only because they are starting from nothing. Our season will depend on how well we play Edmonton and Ottawa, rather than how well we play the other teams. I'm expecting about 6 wins, which won't get us into the playoffs.
The east is a bit harder IMHO.
Ray, assuming he stays healthy elevates Toronto to top spot.
Montreal's defence keeps them in the hunt. Their season will hinge on if Smith is the real deal or not. I think he is, so I'm picking them as #2.
Hamilton made it to the Grey Cup last year, but I don't see a repeat. Callaros was the best available young QB, but young guns rarely make a smooth transition to starter. They'll be in the hunt all year, but I'm guessing 3rd.
Burris will help, but he can't do it on his own so Ottawa will be last in the east, probably last in the league.