HardCoreBlue

Hmm if that's confirmed in what he said, I guess O'Shea himself, as a professional CFL head coach, is thinking whimsical preposterous thoughts.Ya it's confirmed. He said it twice. You think I'm lying? No, not at all. Thank you for posting this. I just wanted to confirm he said it. I was slammed repeatedly by Mr. Dee, WBBFan, Rich, Mike and a few others for talking nonsense, being preposterous and whimsical, why I couldn't be a professional football coach for suggesting that it would have been wise for our head coach to have thrown that challenge flag on that play to slow everything down. Now it's confirmed he agrees. So I'm assuming these same posters will direct their wrath at our Head Coach now for the exact same criticisms they directed towards me. Just because the coach changed his mind, doesn't mean I did. I disagreed with your opinion, but I don't believe I accused you of any of those things. I don't think a coach should waste a challenge on a play he has no evidence will be overturned as you never know what the following play will be and if you wish you still had your challenge and or time-outs. So why would I direct any wrath at the head coach? My point Rich is your (and others) thought process (wasting a challenge) on this particular play with the specific circumstances (time running out, no tape to determine catch or not, opposition hurrying up their offense when they should be burning the clock) is flawed on plays like this with these unique circumstances. And it would seem our Head Coach, upon reflection, would agree. That's all, no more no less.

Hmm if that's confirmed in what he said, I guess O'Shea himself, as a professional CFL head coach, is thinking whimsical preposterous thoughts.Ya it's confirmed. He said it twice. You think I'm lying? No, not at all. Thank you for posting this. I just wanted to confirm he said it. I was slammed repeatedly by Mr. Dee, WBBFan, Rich, Mike and a few others for talking nonsense, being preposterous and whimsical, why I couldn't be a professional football coach for suggesting that it would have been wise for our head coach to have thrown that challenge flag on that play to slow everything down. Now it's confirmed he agrees. So I'm assuming these same posters will direct their wrath at our Head Coach now for the exact same criticisms they directed towards me.

So even if he's injured I can release him for other reasons and can't release him only because he's injured? If so, this would be a close call wouldn't it. Did they decide to cut him prior to knowing of his injury? I don't know what the official rule is and how it's determined and the sequence of things and if that has any bearing on releasing players that are injured.

A more important criteria than sacks would be how disciplined and effective is Peach with his Gap assignments.

Hmm if that's confirmed in what he said, I guess O'Shea himself, as a professional CFL head coach, is thinking whimsical preposterous thoughts.

Yes health #1 as well as good for him in recognizing the importance of knowing football isn't forever.

Yet he's still far better than Brohm. That might be the scariest part about all of this. Brohm isn't a solution to any of our problems, but him and Marve are two sides of the same shitty coin. Why is Brohm still on the team? Can not Nichols or Davis hold the snaps on field goals and converts? Nothing personal I have against him, but he has no future with this team, does he?

Fire MB and let's see what MOS does with a capable OC and a healthy qb. Good thought but whose available that would fit what we need with the talent we presently have (which could all change if we can our existing GM)? Do we go with little experience but forecasted potential (e.g., a Jason Maas type) or do we go with an realistically available OC with appropriate amount of years (3 or more?) of CFL OC experience . . .. And as for the healthy QB, that seems to be a very difficult thing to achieve these days even with a functional Oline.

Totally agree. I was never a fan of MOS as a player but you can tell by his time as a coach in TO that he can coach and knows the game very well. But in TO he had some very athletic players. Thanks to Walters, he has a lousy lineup with atrocious depth. So he's burning out. Same thing happened with LAPO here. Lame GM (Mack) kept feeding him garbage players and he's supposed to make chicken salad out of it. I absolutely guarantee -- if MOS was in Sask with their old, poorly built Taman team he would suck there too. But put him in Hammer or Calgary and he'd have a winning record. Maybe but Austin and Hufnagel's ego might disagree with you.

Just out of curiosity, what does that mean exactly? No tape? or the replay clearly shows good play but the challenge flag still comes out? Because if it's the latter, I've seen it on occasion.

Why be so patronizing? I just think challenging that play would have been a strategic thing he could have done at that moment with what was happening. 20 20 hindsight would suggest the non-action gamble (because that's what it was) cost us on that particular play. I believe that call would have been overturned which would have dramatically changed the course of events but none of us will never know. Mix in the non-penalty call we get later adds salt to the wound.

It pains me to say, but kudos to Calgary, they played it perfectly. To me, and here I'm actually not being critical, just identifying a flaw in the system. A lessons learned, If we don't have the tape at that moment where we have to make an immediate decision on plays that can be challenged at a critical juncture of the game (critical being the key word) and the opposition is doing everything it can to get the next play off, what do we do at that moment? imo, if it's not critical, we're less verklemped in letting the play go but if it's at a critical point in the game where field position, possession, we're behind in the score and time is running out , I'm now more verclemped in letting it go because the impact is now huge, so I call a timeout, have a player fake an injury (which I'm sure never happens) or throw the challenge flag. And as Forest Gump would say that's all I have to say about that.

Yep, just like all the other times O'Shea should have thrown the flag or called a time-out and didn't. The guy sleep-walks through these games having no clue what to do then stands before the media and blames the officials. You think the players don't notice this also? I just can't stomach any more of O'Shea and his mindless stares and stupid smirks. I wouldn't even mind all the losing so much if I didn't have to endure that loser. Really, you're judging him on that? His facial expressions. I'm giving him some flak on not throwing the challenge flag, but I would never assess him, cast my opinion on his ability as a CFL coach because of his facial or body mannerisms. The word silly and foolish has been thrown at me today, fair enough, but on the scale of silliness, that might be the benchmark.

I already qualified that with one of my posts above so thanks for the judgement. And your point about things going hundred miles per hour provides more evidence that if things were going to fast for our head coach (i.e., Calgary running up to the ball after the catch, no word from the spotter, no replay available, no word yea or nay from a player) you need to slow the game down at that point. How? With a challenge flag. Moreover, the logic I'm hearing here from some people is if you have no word from your sources (see my info in parenthesis above) and the opposition is wanting to hurry up to get the next play off, you simply let it happen because your info hasn't come in yet from a play you don't know yet if it was legit. It was at a crucial point in the game, I don't have my info to make a decision, I throw the challenge flag with the risk of losing a timeout. And this is why you'll never be a professional head coach. Seriously, you can find fault with O'Shea for a lot of things, but not throwing the challenge flag because he "thought that they were hurrying up when they shouldn't" is beyond silly. I guess you've never heard of a team speeding up to take advantage of momentum, because they thing that they've got the opposition on their heels? I have. Wow, thanks for the judgement, appreciate the feedback. Don't have to be a professional head coach to make assumptions. The assumption you just made was taking advantage of momentum (and having no other evidence at your disposal) that influences the decision in not throwing a challenge flag. Another assumption, equally valid, is Calgary, who should be trying to burn the clock but hurrying to the ball probably not wanting this play reviewed that can help me make a decision and at the very least slows their momentum which just addressed the assumption you made. Win win.

I don't know, you'd have to ask him and yes I am serious. It's late in the game, my opposition just made a circus catch that I didn't get a view on yet, my opposition is all of a sudden running hurry up to get on the ball quick when they should be taking their time so I need to slow things down now, what's at my disposal? Time out or challenge flag. I choose the challenge flag because the bonus is there's a chance it could be overturned based on Calgary not wanting it reviewed. Little bit more than a whim. You'll probably find that very few professional level coaches use "the force" to make critical decisions. I'm thinking that they rely a lot more on evidence, which O'Shea didn't have available to him at that particular moment. The other way to look at it was he made a decision, without any evidence, to let the play go. If he didn't have time to compile that evidence (Calgary rushing to the ball), you simply let it go? No, you use your options to have time to collect that evidence especially being how critical that play was and the time we had left in the game. Yes I risk losing a timeout, the flip side is I risk letting Calgary move up the field on a non legit play.

I already qualified that with one of my posts above so thanks for the judgement. And your point about things going hundred miles per hour provides more evidence that if things were going to fast for our head coach (i.e., Calgary running up to the ball after the catch, no word from the spotter, no replay available, no word yea or nay from a player) you need to slow the game down at that point. How? With a challenge flag. Moreover, the logic I'm hearing here from some people is if you have no word from your sources (see my info in parenthesis above) and the opposition is wanting to hurry up to get the next play off, you simply let it happen because your info hasn't come in yet from a play you don't know yet if it was legit. It was at a crucial point in the game, I don't have my info to make a decision, I throw the challenge flag with the risk of losing a timeout.

I don't know, you'd have to ask him and yes I am serious. It's late in the game, my opposition just made a circus catch that I didn't get a view on yet, my opposition is all of a sudden running hurry up to get on the ball quick when they should be taking their time so I need to slow things down now, what's at my disposal? Time out or challenge flag. I choose the challenge flag because the bonus is there's a chance it could be overturned based on Calgary not wanting it reviewed. Little bit more than a whim.

It was bang bang as calgary knew it and was in hurry up.. Apparently the feed to our booth staff was down or something so they didnt see it and I didnt see any defenders telling Hall or Oshea to toss the flag.. From what I've heard the coaching staff don't have a special feed for replays. They're basically watching it on monitors using the same feed as us at home watching it on TV. When I saw the first replay I yelled to throw the challenge flag and within a second or less the play was whistled in. It was that fast. What pissed me off is neither Suitor or Black said one word about the catch not being made. All they did was go on and on about what a great catch it was. They should have their football memberships cards revoked. Not to get too critical and knowing when the bullets are flying it's a much different scenario than me sitting in front of a tv in a relaxed atmosphere, but the challenge flag needed to come out as soon as Rogers got back up and the refs signaled good catch.

You're right no guarantees, hasn't proven anything, but all the scouting reports on this kid suggest he's going to be great in the same class has Crosby et al. A little bit more than hype than some other players.

True however when your opposition is wanting to get on the ball quick at a time they should be burning the clock, throw the challenge flag. Throwing the challenge flag could also be seen as calling a timeout as well.

It was bang bang as calgary knew it and was in hurry up.. Apparently the feed to our booth staff was down or something so they didnt see it and I didnt see any defenders telling Hall or Oshea to toss the flag.. I hear you and hindsight as we know is usually 20 20. However, as a head coach if your opposition is in hurry up after a circus catch and their in the lead where they should be taking their time to burn the clock you might think something is up with that catch so throw the challenge flag and slow things down. Just saying.

That pass back to Bo Levi was perfectly called, he could have walked into the endzone if Mcdaniels makes the throw.

The only positive thing that comes out of those jersey's is using them to help Eskimo fans decipher the difference between Yellow and Gold. The Eskimos are Green and Yellow NOT Green and Gold! So here ends my rant.

Maybe, but didn't save Chamblin and Taman with Durant (and Glenn for a time) going down. A lot of differences between Saskatchewan and here. The Riders biggest problems are on defense which was Chamblin's baby. They were 0-4 going into the game when Glenn was injured because of the defense and they were 0-9 when the two were fired mostly because of the defense. As well, there were off-field issues that the team's President had with Taman that also lead to Taman's firing: http://www.leaderpost.com/business/field+issues+contributed+Taman+firing/11333228/story.html True, I'm not trying to defend them, but it doesn't cancel out the fact they lost their #1 and #2 qb's, the generals of their team.

Maybe, but didn't save Chamblin and Taman with Durant (and Glenn for a time) going down. Reading up on the Chamblin Taman stuff... those 2 really screwed the riders hard. 1/3 of that rider team is 30 or older. They have nobody in the pipeline. They have no cap space even with guys on IR. It's not a fair comparison because it was very obvious Chamblin lost the team. It's not obvious here and despite what maybe 2 or 3 people on here say... Mos has not lost the room. Chamblin did. I think MOS is on the other end of the spectrum right now compared to Chamblin's coaching style. i.e., wants to me more of a player coach than hard ass. e.g., not throwing his players under the bus even if they deserve it when talking about our current record. However, there are limitations as we know with that style. I think MOS eventually will find his style/his identity, get the experience he needs and become a good CFL coach. Whether it's with us or not, don't know. More of the issue that frustrates a lot of us is the Bombers for the last while have become a training facility for rookie head coaches. Let's move on from that show when we hire a new head coach, whenever that may be.