Blue-urns

Dave Dickenson would be my first choice, and as much as I don't trust defensive coordinators, my second choice would probably be Chris Jones.

You, sir, have a fantastic handle and avatar....

Well I've given up on the playoffs after they lost to Hamilton last week, I just want some company down here so there's other people to laugh at.

Mack says they werent allowed to talk to him.
 
Wally says he only had one team to work with.
 
Seems obvious to me that Wally wouldnt let us talk to him so we said "get bent".
 
Mike's logic is the most sound.  Reilly wanted Edmonton and Mack was wise enough not to trade an asset for the right to be told "no thanks".

Now you're just skewing around.

Just out of curiosity ...
 
In your opinion, how much diligence is due? I mean, to me, it's an obvious red flag when Wally says "Edmonton is allowed to talk to him, but Winnipeg isn't"
 
Why isn't Winnipeg? The obvious answer to me is that Wally knew we wouldn't like what Reilly's agent had to say.

Walters said he made contact to establish communications just in case.  Nobody said Mack never talked to them...that's what you would like to believe. Let's get it right before you spout off.

The actual Walters quotes or the editorializing that was done by the author of the piece? You know what Walters said? 
 
"I don't know that there needed to be fence-mending, but certainly I made a point to touch base with everybody," 
 
little different than what you're trying to say right? 

So which is it? Did Mack spend his whole time here playing it safe, or did he spend his whole time here taking chances?
 
Because everyone for the last 3 years has been on him about making "off the board" draft picks and taking chances on guys that weren't the slam dunk (some panned out, some took a while to pan out, and some are average). I think we can also agree that signing Buck Pierce prior to the 2010 season was a massive chance he took, too.
 
Yes, when it came to throwing money at free agents, he didn't take very many risks (or, he made some offers, but didn't risk as much as other teams and thus lost out -- again, many of those decisions turned out to be the right one).
 
At this stage, there's no way I can defend the Joe Mack era. I feel we had (mostly) terrible coaching during his entire tenure here, we've started to revamp and improve the O-line (which while I think sets us up for the long run, did not allow us to be successful over the last 3.5 years), and obvioulsy dropped the ball in the QB department (for a variety of reasons not necessarily all attributable to Mack, but certainly not free of his choices/influence, as well).
 
But his intensions -- to slowly and patiently build depth to this Football Club that could set us up as a winner for years to come -- were on the money. Unfortunately, he didn't start with a team the way the other standard bearers had.
Jim Popp started with a stacked all-American team with the Stallions in 1994, and only had to replace depth with depth moving forward. They continually have enough talent that the depth they bring in has time to grow into a starting role. Oh, and Tracy Hamm followed by Anthony Calvillo.
Wally Buono came into a B.C. Lions team in 2003 great receiving talent (Simon, Clerement, Thelwell) and brought Dave Dickinson back to the CFL. He's kept them in it by finding talent, developing it, not overpaying vets or bringing in high-priced, flashy free agents.
John Hufnagel inherited a team in 2008 with Henry Burris, Joffrey Reynolds, and that insanely good receiving corps. He also had a coach (himself) coming off coaching the likes of Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and Eli Manning in the NFL. He's built a solid nucleus, and out of the 3 definitely takes the most chances on free agents and draft picks (some that pan out, some that don't), but he started his regime with enough talent already returning in order to win a championship in Year 1.
Joe Mack inherited a mess of missing draft picks, no QB, a faltering O-line with one solid player, and no Canadian depth. Admittedly, he couldn't fix things. He probably shouldn't have had to model this franchise after Montreal and B.C. when we didn't have the talent yet to be so catious and long-term thinking. He should've done everything he could've to bring that big talent in first, and then worried about building stability from there.
 
I still say the calm, rational approach where you only take a few big chances each year and for the most part trust your own eye for talent and that of the team you assemble below you is the most effective approach. It's kept the Als and the Lions in it for almost every year over the last decade (and more for the Als). Too bad it couldn't have possibly worked here.

I'm suggesting that it was, at the very least, defensible. And I would argue that he did take chances at the QB spot. He signed Steven Jyles and Buck Pierce in free agency, and brought in 9 QBs during his tenure. And if putting all of your eggs in the Buck Pierce basket when your job is on the line isn't taking a risk, I don't know what is. You can fault him for his decision making, but he certainly was not a guy who "never took a chance".
 
The one point about Mack I will bring up is this: he may have already found a solution to the QB problem. It may have been either Elliott or Brink, it could have possibly been Buck, it may yet be Goltz or Hall. But as long as you have an offensive line where not one player on the line is a top-3 player at his position, and the best IMPORT RIGHT TACKLE you can find is Shannon Effing Boatman, it doesn't matter how many free agent quarterbacks you do or don't trade for. 

Who exactly looks foolish?
 
Glenn was 13-18 in that game, much better than Buck's 16-28 with 1 INT.
 
Or I suppose we should blame Glenn for having his ankle rolled on the first play of the second half.

well except that PIerce wasn't good enough... They won the east final on the strength of the defense and running game. What did Pierce do in the Grey Cup game other than suck balls until garbage time? The thing that no one backing Pierce seems to want to address is that his struggles are not a new thing, he's been going downhill every since 2010 at the earliest and partway through 2011 at the latest. 

No that's not the case at all. Glenn being bad was still better than Pierce this season and last as well. The biggest problem is that since 2007 the bar for what is seen as acceptable qbing has been lowered and lowered and lowered and lowered to the point where barely average is seen as good. 

fast enough to run for a touchdown

The Lions didn't offer Reilly to anyone.
 
They offered the rights to Reilly with the ability to negotiate prior to a deal to Edmonton.
They offered the rights to Reilly with no ability to negotiate prior to a deal to Winnipeg.
 
There is a HUGE difference.

This is what ticks me off the most about people that just blindly hate Mack.  They criticize him for things he doesn't deserve criticism for.
 
The man built a currently 1-6 team, and one that has sucked for two years now.  There is plenty of legitimate things to criticize Mack for.  That does not mean every move (or non-move) he made was wrong.  Fans at this point just love to revise history here and blame literally everything on him now.  I could not stop facepalming through half this thread. 

Mack is responsible for the product on the field. We are 1-6 due very largely to Mack's decisions. That doesn't necessarily mean he was wrong for not giving up potential NI assets for the opportunity to just talk to a guy who was free to join any team he wanted to within a week of that deal.

I don't think it's that ISO.  I'm not a Joe Mack supporter but I think he made the right move.  Reilly wanted Edmonton and Mack stated the facts.  Even if we got him, he'd have big leverage and could leave anyway.  It would have been stupid for him to even try to go after him.  Now Glenn on the other hand...that's another story.
 
In any case Blitzmore is right...we're just beating a dead horse here.  We don't have Reilly or Glenn, so there's no point arguing over why they aren't here.  The question is, what can we do now.

None of this matters anymore!!!
 
We have an 8 or 9 year veteran who is beyond his expiry date
 
We have two unproven backups...neither one of which might win the job
 
We need another QB in the mix ASAP, preferably Collaros, Willy, Mitchell
 
The Coaches don't think Goltz is ready...he needs more work
They're not sure about Hall, as none of us are at this point.
 
The backups here just don't get a fair shake when you are in panic mode.
 
We should be working on that now!

just to be fair, we did hear Labattes side of things in that deal too. Labatte admitted that he didn't communicate with Winnipeg about his desire not to switch to centre. 

Ricky has under rated arm strength,  those deep balls to the corner of the end zone are beautiful and not easy to make.     
 
Khari had a good arm before being completely crippled....  afterwards it was a sad sad sight.  

Well, here's hoping you're dead wrong also.
 
But that's the bloody point isn't it? We need to know and the only way we're going to find out is by their playing.
We were in this exact position last year and we frittered away any opportunity to play Brink and Elliott correctly because we stuck with Buck. 
We now have until year's end to at least make one correct call.
(we already know future cut)
 
If there's any questions of turnovers (player wise) I'd like us to know ASAP because it seems this regime is not going to stand pat or buck or whomever.

I don't care how effin strong his arm is... if he puts it on the money consistently, he'll move our offense, and we will go places.  See: Ray, Ricky. 

Except we have. Both Goltz and Hall played up to Pierce's level. Not the Pierce from 2 years ago, the Pierce from this year.

You think it was listening to the fan base and not releasing Glenn in the mistaken belief that Kelly could perform miracles with LeFors?
 
Or...
 
That Glenn was due to receive a substantial bonus?
 
More likely a combination of the two.
 
Highly unlikely Kelly gave a **** what the fan base wanted.