17to85

I like what you're saying overall in this post, I really do. But remarkably coming from a person like me who coaches Atom football players where 100% effort and focus is everything, this statement imho is blinding some Bomber decision-makers from corrececly evaluating players and making some tough decisions. The tough reality being that regardless of 100% effort every play every down and being a loyal team member to a fault is unfortunately not good enough to guarantee a roster spot/starting position. We aren't in Atom, Peewee or Bantam anymore. When I really think about it, that's how Wade Miller was able to be a Bomber for so long . He was simply not talented enough to warrant taking up a roster spot but boy was he loyal, focussed and a hard worker. Probably why he got into private business. Now that he's leading this organization with a head coach who seems to be molded quite similarly, this color blindedness of seeing effort/loyalty as the end all be all of who deserves to be a Bomber concerns me. Bullshit. Wade Miller may not have been the most talented guy but there was a time when he was one of the teams best special teams players and he clearly had the talent to be a CFLer. Thanks for your opinion, but to use your well used quote on other people, your opinion is not based on fact. Wade Miller was not a very good football player, that's a fact. He was also the same guy who came out and said he would quit the team if a very bad coach was fired which would suggest not the best judgement of talent as well. Do love his loyalty and commitment though, misguided at times. It's based on a hell of a lot more facts than your erroneous claims that he wasn't a very good football player. Guys who aren't good football players simply don't have the kind of careers that Miller had. What facts are you willing to bring to this argument other than "I watched him good and he sucked!!!11!"?

There is still a large difference between what organizations do internally and say externally to the media. Words are cheap, and in this day and age organizations keep things closer to their vest. I'd be willing to bet that O'Shea, Walters, and Miller aren't at all happy with the way this season has turned out, and are already planning on how to start addressing these things going forward. There are multiple reasons not to to divulge these things in the media, some of them including tipping your hate to the 8 other teams in the league as well as leaving your options open as your plan changes and evolves as you evaluate going forward. Actions will always speak louder then words. And we really won't know what the leaders of this organization think or where they see problems until training camp next year when we see who they kept, who they released, and where they brought in talent. Whatever is said now is really just lip service, whatever is said. Given what we know about O'Shea from his time as a player does anyone here actually think that he's not the most pissed off guy out there about how the season ended? That dude was super competitive and I guarantee he is not happy with the way the season ended.

I don't think it's a problem with MOS being unable to see who the better players are, I think he knows damned well who the better players are, I think the problem he had was an unwillingness to make changes to the roster if someone was playing OK. A big part of being successful is knowing when to make a move and when you should replace someone who isn't doing anything wrong because the guy behind him is better. 5-1 to start and then a bunch of close losses made it seem that things were close so they kept hoping the mistakes on the field would be taken care of and the wins would come. We saw though after some blow out losses that he changed up the roster, that tells me that a lesson was learned.

A win in 2001, 2007 or 2011 would have done great things for the team because it would have cleared a lot of the angst away from some people and there wouldn't be that pressure heaped on the team because of it.

I really think what it comes down to is that a lot of fans want to see the coaches and players as angry as they themselves are after losses.

common sense says that if you can get pressure sacks will follow. I don't think you'd see too many people who get a sack every time they get pressure, but if you can consistently generate pressure you will consistently be getting sacks. We can look at the Bombers this season, early in the year they were better at getting pressure on the qb and their sack numbers were in the top part of the league sack race, but that ability to generate pressure lessened as the year went on and now the team is near the bottom of the sack race. One leads to the other.

People still don't get that O'Shea doesn't talk about this stuff in the media? You think he really doesn't know where mistakes were made? Is that more believable than he's just refusing to tell the media anything? Come on now, it's been his MO all season long.

you got the winning lotto numbers in that crystal ball of yours too?

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them. Not necessarily when it comes to passing yards, as I've already shown. No you took a limited sample size and drew conclusions that fit your line of thinking. One season is hardly a representative sample especially when this season has been as odd as it has with wins and losses for everyone. It's nothing to do with the number of tds thrown vs. ints, it simply comes down to turnovers and teams that don't take care of the football lose. You'd be further ahead simply saying ints are a better measure of a qb. You look at big picture sample sizes and you'll see that better stats = more wins, that's just inarguable because putting up passing yards means your offense is moving the ball and more than likely scoring points. You keep insisting passing yards are over rated, they're not. Not at all, but like any statistic it's just one thing to look at. I don't know why you feel the need to try and put some above the other... oh yeah, you're trying to crap on Drew Willy that's why.

I thought you said enough of the blame game?

I like what you're saying overall in this post, I really do. But remarkably coming from a person like me who coaches Atom football players where 100% effort and focus is everything, this statement imho is blinding some Bomber decision-makers from corrececly evaluating players and making some tough decisions. The tough reality being that regardless of 100% effort every play every down and being a loyal team member to a fault is unfortunately not good enough to guarantee a roster spot/starting position. We aren't in Atom, Peewee or Bantam anymore. When I really think about it, that's how Wade Miller was able to be a Bomber for so long . He was simply not talented enough to warrant taking up a roster spot but boy was he loyal, focussed and a hard worker. Probably why he got into private business. Now that he's leading this organization with a head coach who seems to be molded quite similarly, this color blindedness of seeing effort/loyalty as the end all be all of who deserves to be a Bomber concerns me. Bullshit. Wade Miller may not have been the most talented guy but there was a time when he was one of the teams best special teams players and he clearly had the talent to be a CFLer.

Really? Is it that ridiculous to think that passing yards are overrated when evaluating a quarterback? Or that Willy needs to make better decisions with the ball in his hands? yes. Passing yards are one of the biggest numbers for a qb, the others on that level are going to be completion % and tds in my mind. You want a qb who can complete passes and throw tds. Yardage just goes along with the completing passes.

The Riders were 8-2 with Durant throwing for 172 yards a game, they've been 1-6 without him while averaging something like 225 yards a game passing. As Yourface already stated, the correlation between throwing for a ton of yards and winning football games isn't there. sure it is, but 225 yards isn't throwing for a ton of yards, in fact it's a pretty poor total. With Willy we're not talking about a guy who threw for 5000 yards either, 3500 yards is a good season for a qb in the CFL but it's not an outstanding season either. I think some people are skewing things way way too much. You show me a qb that throws for 350 yards a game consistently though and I'll show you a correlation between winning and losing. Stats are a measure of what teams accomplish, any good stat correlates to winning and any bad stat correlates to losing, that's just the nature of them.

not always. Yards correlate with moving the ball and TOP and all that. As I pointed out, if a team moves into the redzone but opts to run the ball into the endzone then the td-int ratio isn't all that important right? You're just trying to pick and choose what you want to use. Everything needs context. Quite honestly you can assess the qb performance for this team without using any stats. The eye test is still good enough for football. These would be today's standings if teams were placed based on passing yards. West: East: 1. WPG 4,276 1. TOR 4,461 2. BC 4,009 2. HAM 4,422 3. EDM 3,848 3. OTT 3,788 4. CGY 3,660 4. MTL 3,234 5. SSK 3,379 And if they were drafted in accordance with the TD-INT ratio... West: East: 1. CGY +14 1. TOR +13 2. EDM +7 2. HAM +3 3. BC +7 3. MTL 0 4. SSK -1 4. OTT -1 5. WPG -3 To me it seems that the TD-INT ratio paints a much more accurate picture. The only team that is misplaced is Montreal (who have been overachieving this year IMO) That is more to do with the overall turnover amount than td-int ratio of a quarterback. There is a well established trend in the CFL of teams that turn over the ball more lose more. You are trying to assign too much importance in winning and losing to quarterbacks I think. Willys numbers all told pretty accurately describe the Bombers season. Team that can't run so the qb has to pass more, but some mistakes made as a result which have held the team back from winning more games. Guy has played well though despite that. There are a lot of factors contributing to his play. That lack of a running game is one. How do the win/loss records look if you base it on total offensive yards? Some teams do rely a lot on the running game, thinking Calgary and Saskatchewan in particular.

Hell I'd give the kid the defensive nod too just to send a message.

I forget exactly when it happened but at the start of the year I thought the OL was doing a pretty decent job, but there was a change in teams strategies against the Bombers, they started to just blitz all the time and it always got enough pressure on the qb to disrupt him. We didn't really do anything to slow it down. Teams just kept coming and coming and coming with pressure. Once you get into that area your offense is sunk. You need to be able to slow down a blitz and the Bombers didn't make the adjustment to do that.

I would suggest that the insistence of teams to continue to try and use as many canadians as possible on the OL is the culprit. Teams are bringing in a ton of very skilled pass rushers and defensive linemen these days and trying to get by with NIs on the OL they're getting over whelmed. The fact that even import OL are deemed as replaceable parts is likely another reason. OL play across the league has been pretty poor overall. I would suggest that this has more to do with defenses having adjusted and caught up with what offenses in the CFL are doing right now moreso than anything else. Too many guys in the pocket without really changing that. Maybe time to go back to more moving the qb around rather than opting for the presnap reads and quick decisions. That worked for a while but teams have caught on defensively I think.

People are welcome to defend their positions and show some intelligence. Trouble is a lot of them just get offended instead of doing that which basically is proving that their opinions are based on emotions rather than logic.

I actually saw a piece the other day that explains the reasoning for that lawsuit and it's less to do with actually winning a lawsuit. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/28/jian-ghomseshi-lawsuit-cbc/

The max protect schemes worked for Montreal because: a) They had a QB who could throw into tight coverage effectively The running game was effective enough to keep the D off balance I think focussing on the max protect idea is wrong.. the real concerning things to me would be the lack of moving the pocket, the lack of slide protections all that kind of thing. When you basically tell the OL to just catch the incoming rushers (which is the impression I get from the article) you're just making it harder on your OL and easier on the guys rushing the qb. Change it up, throw the D off balance. That seems like a big part of the problem with the offense lately to be honest, no one is fooled they know exactly what is coming. Was a problem with Bellefeuille in all his other stops too. He was very vanilla and it was predictable and easier to stop if the talent didn't just out skill their opponents.

part of putting your opinion out there is subjecting it to the judgement of the masses. Not every opinion is valid or good and if you can't handle people judging your opinions then lurking is the best place for someone to be. As for homers. gloomers or whatever else, it's not about being negative, it's just that some people do fall into these categories. I can think of some people who always say positive things about the team, and I can think of people who do massively under rate things about this team. This isn't about disagreeing with opinions, it's about some people always acting in the same way. I like to think that I am a positive person in general with regards to the Bombers, but I can point out when something isn't good enough without resorting to the hyperbole that some people seem to need to do. Flaws can be pointed out without the doom and gloom. Positives can be pointed out without being a kool aid drinker. A lot of people here don't seem to get that though. Then judge people's opinions, I have no issues with that. Calling someone stupid, dumb, or any personal insult is what I have issue with. That includes calling someone's opinion stupid. If you feel that passionately about what someone typed to actually respond to it, then tell them why you disagree with it, not simply that it is a dumb opinion. I've seen message boards were new people posting are jumped on by multiple different people when they post. Haven't really seen it happen here, but that pack mentality is bad for message boards. I am sorry but some opinions are stupid and deserve to be called so. To not do it is to do a disservice to people. They will go on continuing to think just because it's their opinion that it's valid and right because everyone is entitled to their opinions. That is not true at all. If you give someone constructive criticism, then you have given them the exact reason why what they said is wrong. Words like stupid, other than the fact that they are insulting, are too vague. They don't explain why they're wrong. Also, if you bash someone's opinion more (insulting more than constructive), then the other person may be even more defiant and get defensive and continue to back up their incorrect opinion. My $.02. That is what separates the people who just want to hear themselves ***** and moan and vent and the people who actually have some solid reasoning behind their opinions. If you can't defend your opinion it's probably invalid. If you can defend it though then you're ahead of the game. It's kind of amazing that a 14 year old kid gets it better than a grown adult. In any intelligent discussion .. if you have to resort to base name calling .. regardless of the opinion, subject matter or how you feel about a given topic. You've lost. Lack of civility almost always derails any rational exchange; it resuls in polarization and limits the ability to find a middle ground. If anything, people who resort to name calling are the ones, ".. who just want to hear themselves ***** and moan .." because they show themselves unwilling to participate in thoughtful conversation. /shrug. At any rate, I hope we can return to discussing football .. the end of this season and what's on the horizon for next year .. I hate having to lock topics. No that's flawed because middle ground doesn't exist in a lot of cases and there's no need to meet there. This isn't a negotiation. And given some of the people around here it's not intelligent discussion either. All that 14 year old kid gets is his feelings hurt when people don't like him. Some opinions are crap and deserve to be treated like it. I'll participate in thoughtful discussion, but a lot of times there's no thought put in by people and I'm not going to pretend that there is. Too many overly sensitive types around here.

not always. Yards correlate with moving the ball and TOP and all that. As I pointed out, if a team moves into the redzone but opts to run the ball into the endzone then the td-int ratio isn't all that important right? You're just trying to pick and choose what you want to use. Everything needs context. Quite honestly you can assess the qb performance for this team without using any stats. The eye test is still good enough for football.

part of putting your opinion out there is subjecting it to the judgement of the masses. Not every opinion is valid or good and if you can't handle people judging your opinions then lurking is the best place for someone to be. As for homers. gloomers or whatever else, it's not about being negative, it's just that some people do fall into these categories. I can think of some people who always say positive things about the team, and I can think of people who do massively under rate things about this team. This isn't about disagreeing with opinions, it's about some people always acting in the same way. I like to think that I am a positive person in general with regards to the Bombers, but I can point out when something isn't good enough without resorting to the hyperbole that some people seem to need to do. Flaws can be pointed out without the doom and gloom. Positives can be pointed out without being a kool aid drinker. A lot of people here don't seem to get that though. Then judge people's opinions, I have no issues with that. Calling someone stupid, dumb, or any personal insult is what I have issue with. That includes calling someone's opinion stupid. If you feel that passionately about what someone typed to actually respond to it, then tell them why you disagree with it, not simply that it is a dumb opinion. I've seen message boards were new people posting are jumped on by multiple different people when they post. Haven't really seen it happen here, but that pack mentality is bad for message boards. I am sorry but some opinions are stupid and deserve to be called so. To not do it is to do a disservice to people. They will go on continuing to think just because it's their opinion that it's valid and right because everyone is entitled to their opinions. That is not true at all. If you give someone constructive criticism, then you have given them the exact reason why what they said is wrong. Words like stupid, other than the fact that they are insulting, are too vague. They don't explain why they're wrong. Also, if you bash someone's opinion more (insulting more than constructive), then the other person may be even more defiant and get defensive and continue to back up their incorrect opinion. My $.02. That is what separates the people who just want to hear themselves ***** and moan and vent and the people who actually have some solid reasoning behind their opinions. If you can't defend your opinion it's probably invalid. If you can defend it though then you're ahead of the game.

Calgary radio acts like douchebags? No kidding. The egos by fans and media in Southern Alberta with regards to their sports teams are out of control and they are the most unjustified ever. You'd think that the Stamps would be a bit more careful about talking about another teams lack of winning when they've got themselves quite the reputation of choking when the games actually matter. All those great regular seasons and only the one Grey Cup to show for it since Hufnagel showed up.

no this is 100% false. Some opinions can be dumb and incorrect and some smart and correct. "I like chocolate more than vanilla" is a subjective opinion that depends on the person expressing said opinion, "In my opinion Drew Willy can't read a defense" is a dumb and incorrect opinion. All "opinions" are subjective, regardless of their correctness. You seem to take it upon yourself frequently to be the arbiter of others opinions. I don't think that's helpful, and points I think to what the OP was saying in the first place. That's because I am the arbiter. I bet I've been a fan of this team for longer than you've been alive. Your judgment of others "level" of fan support means absolutely nothing to anyone, except you. Don't you think it would be more productive to try to not antagonize people all the time? Good for you? Does that make a difference? A lot of people like to claim to be huge fans without actually backing it up, I'm just pointing out when people are wrong. If you think anything is personal, it's not, you just might happen to be one of those people who are always wrong and need the most correcting.