StevetheClub

The problem I have with the call is that it just seems like O'Shea wasn't reading the game well. Yes, he's called for punts with the Bombers deep in their own end in other games but in those games the defence was shutting the opposition down, not getting run over like they were that game (and the one before). Yes, the Bombers have struggled in short yardage in other games but they had been doing very well all that game. Based on how the game was going I still think the low-risk call was gambling, not expecting the defence the stop an offence whose strength plays to the Bomber's weakness. The call makes a little more sense, though I still don't agree with it, if it put the Riders in a position to have to score a touchdown to win but all they needed was a field goal. Based on the evidence staring him in the face, I just don't see how O'Shea expects the Riders not to move the ball enough for at least a field goal.

Considering that the team was pretty good on D all game and has been decent throughout the year and the teams biggest weakness is being able to get the hard yards when they're in short yardage I think you are assigning too high a % for success. Remember this team has failed to convert 3rd and 1 multiple times against worse defenses than the Riders. Nothing is guaranteed in football, all you can do is make plays when you are put in a position to do so and the defense utterly failed at the end of the game. I would have gone for the 3rd down gamble personally, but that's just my attitude, I didn't have a problem with O'Shea taking the lead and trusting his defense to win the game for him. They had many chances to make it happen and didn't c'est la vie. Except that Messam already had multiple double digit runs so it was pretty clear the run game, in particular Messam, was not going to be stopped. And though 3rd and shorts have been an adventure this season today the Bombers executed very well and got good pushes on their gambles. Finally, O'Shea has done a great job reading games and trusting in the D when they are stopping the opposition. Today he simply had too much, unfounded, faith in the D. They should have went for it. Even if they don't get the touchdown they leave far less time on the clock.

I'm not about to defend his entire body of work but I don't see why there is such a backlash about this article. What I took away from it is that despite the recent success of the Bombers a long term vision is needed for long term success, which may mean trading a valuable International for a decent National on the OL (which is clearly not impossible, despite the opinions of some posters, given that, as Lawless points out, Hall and a pick were recently traded for Neufeld).

stoddard... The best adequate canadian receiever ever! hands of glue no doubt but otherwise...? Haha yeah, I was thinking the same thing. A reliable receiver no doubt, but I'd say there's just a slight drop off from Gordon to Stoddard.

Bah. Nothing against you personally but this response always frustrates me. I get the point, that somebody can look good in practise and crap the bed in a real game, but I say a large part of the fun of being a fan is pondering the "what if" questions and enjoying the potential. So what if sometimes you're left disappointed? Enjoy the ride and look forward to the potential of the next player.

Great post. That being said I still believe paying a soon to be 39 year old wildly inconsistent quarterback is extremely short sighted even if it doesn't handcuff us financially. I just don't see the point in investing money in a QB that by the time he is ready to ride off into retirement, the team will be in a position to compete for a championship. I think it also delays the development of whoever will be #2 on the depth chart for the season whether that be Willy or someone else. Because in addition to making this franchise consistently competitive long term, Walters, O'Shea and co. are tasked with making this team respectable NOW - like, for this upcoming season. I know some will disagree, but we just can't be okay with another 3 win season. To even try and make this team consistently competitive and challenging for the Cup, we need to gain some ounce (sorry, litre) of RESPECT from around the league - and we're not doing that until we win some damn football games. Burris needs to be brought in because he's the best available right now - Willy or any other QB is a non-factor at this point b/c they're still FA. Not getting Burris, and potentially not getting Willy would be an absolute disaster for this team - going in with some sort of Hall, Goltz and newbie combo? Puh-leaze! I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks Burris will win us a Cup, or that he's the long term solution - but he absolutely makes us a FAR better team the second we sign him. Exactly. While unearthing and developing talent via scouting and drafting is important, keeping the talent you have and attracting new talent is also very important. And so, someone like Burris is like putting a new coat of paint on a house when you're trying to sell it; if we're going to draw interest, we need to the optics to change now. Winnipeg needs to become a more attractive destination for both established free agent vets - both ours and those from other teams - and for players new to the CFL. Success will breed success and the developmental project players we bring in will benefit from it, not be victims of it.

Man I miss 13thman. It was so good to have a place where all fans went so you could keep up with all the teams in one place.