HardCoreBlue

I'm always perplexed when posters post things like this. We're stating opinions, sometimes based in fact, sometimes not, sometimes using our perspective, sometimes not, knowing we will have no say in the decision. Is this just a nice way at telling people to shut-up? Anyways, no thanks on Khari. A poster said this about Tim Burke and I think it applies to Khari Jones: "The Winnipeg BlueBomber Football Organization is not a coaching school'. It's one of the best lines I heard all year this year.

While muttering "I've got a bad feeling about this'

Something to the effect of (and I'm paraphrasing): why would I want to go there .. it's where kickers and their careers go to die .. Obviously he knows nothing about Bob Cameron. He could have at least qualified his remark geez. I'd take him.

Agree, good point. However, regardless of his level of impact to the team compared to the coach, the baggage he brings has to be disposed of. Unfair, maybe. But, remarkably coming from a guy like me, it's the unfortunate but needed decision in trying to run a successful business. Athletes now this, because most of them always call their vocation a business.

Unfortunately for Goltz he is in the same predicament as Burke. Regardless of his potential, if we are serious/commited in moving forward in creating a new, diffirent type of environment, we simply can't have him around due to the baggage, his fault or not.

Many good posts here that really reflects how close some of you follow the Bombers and the intimate knowledge you have about the game and players abilities. Wow. I'm no where near that type of understanding and rely on lot of you on that so I can constantly learn about that side of the game (especially now that I'm an assistant football coach for my nine year old son!). I'm your typical armchair QB that has closely watched the Bombers over time and gets extremely emotional in how they do. However I do think I can offer another layer to this conversation that I believe is equally important to the success of our team. If was GM I would a) rely on people like you, the experts, to help me make decisions on the nuts and bolts of scouting, drafting, protecting, signing etc and I would spend my more of time focusing on player, team, coaches, management dynamics to improve our 'culture' going forward. Similar to what Ed Hervey recently said, what types of people does this organization need to be successful for years to come (outside of their needed atleticism and knowledge of X's and O's)? I would develop a comprehensive list of these needed intangibles customized for this organization, the stuff you really can't quantifiablly measure, to help this organization turn around it's recent fortunes (I might get some help from outside expert sources who have no connection to this team to help create this list). Then I would compare this list to what we currently have in place from a player, coach, management, scout, marketing etc level) and begin to fill-in the gaps. I would be sure that I engage the right people at the right times appropriately and strategicically to ensure I'm being inclusive in my approach in this very important exercise to complement what a lot of you have said you'd do if you were GM. My hope is that it isn't Kyle Walters and Wade Miller cooking stuff up on the layer I'm focused on then pushing it out to the rest of the organization to accept. That will not work out well for us in the long term. If anyone in the organization doesn't believe in the importance of this type of focus and thinks it's soft and airy fairy I would ask them to leave the organization. As a GM, I obviously want to build a competitive team that wins sooner than later but I want to equally be part of building a healthy culture that would stay way after I drifted off into the sunset. That would be a great legacy to leave if you gave me the GM chair.

Wow, seriously, wow, if I'm a quality player who wants to be part of close-knit team and after hearing Burke's ongoing comments about 'talent defiencies, being bad etc.' why on earth would I want to here? The head coach ultimately sets the tone in the locker room and by his own words, he has failed miserably. I'm not suggesting there wern't bad players and talent defiencies, every team is met with that challenge for sure. I like his honesty, his humor, I always have, but I don't like his suttle and not so suttle 'throw under the bus' comments that are piling up. He isn't only jeopardizing his existing job, he's jeopardizing getting another job imo. Positive, challenging, supporting culture is huge in football, in any sport, in any profession and Burke is demonstrating that he is extremely weak in this area. Huge red flags if I'm thinking of hiring him. He needs to make adjustments quickly to repair/strengthen his reputation. Just some friendly non-solicited advice from me to him.

Well that'd be awfully ironiclol touche.. but burkes only been a hc for how long? mistakes are to be expected unfortunately.. Burke's been a head coach for longer than the majority of our roster have been pro football players. i dunno, guys who go thru big colleges are trained to be "pros" living by certain restrictions and acting a certain way.. you pull the same stuff as a pro in college, you get the boot.. i get you despise burke and his HC ability thus far but you gotta admit, he is (was?) not in the best position for success.. he would have to been an outstanding head coach to have any.success with the bullshit that has gone on here in the the last 2 seasons.. rarely. As for Burke, he has himself to blame for a strong majority of this team's issues. Yes, he's responsible for his coaching responsibilities/accountabilities and needs to shoulder that awy better than he is demonstrating BUT accountability and responsibility in a professional organization is a shared thing and this year does not fall completely on Burke's doorstep. Yes of course he has to go but a few others need top follow him out the door.

It's obviously a combination of things for our disaterous season. Appropriate blame can be evenly distributed among the many levels of the organization, top to bottom, bottom to top for different reasons but ultimately sharing the same outcome. But to have some fun, simply moving Calgary's entire management/coaching staff over to us, I still don't know if that would have got us into this year's post season with our existing starting and practice roster. I think it absolutely would have had this team into the post season. Not like the other eastern teams have been world beaters. Look at the improvements this offense has made with swapping offensive coordinators, and it's not like Bellefeuile is a great OC or anything. Put a good coaching staff like Calgary has on this team from day 1 and I have no doubts there are a playoff team because good coaches make players better and bad coaches make players look worse than they are. Yup, good point, agree completely but still not sure if it would have put us over the top (i.e., enough to make the playoffs) with the group we assembled this year . . .

It's obviously a combination of things for our disaterous season. Appropriate blame can be evenly distributed among the many levels of the organization, top to bottom, bottom to top for different reasons but ultimately sharing the same outcome. But to have some fun, simply moving Calgary's entire management/coaching staff over to us, I still don't know if that would have got us into this year's post season with our existing starting and practice roster.

Agreed. Aside from Walters and Dickenson, this is a terrible list. No, aside from Dickenson that is a terrible list. Mark my words, we will NOT win a Grey Cup with Walters running things. This team needs and entire reboot in attitude and ideology. It needs a proven winner. That's not Walters, at least not right now. As sad as the above list is, I can pretty much guarantee we will see a lot of those names (except Rick C will be HC of the Esks). Could see us giving the headset to Khari. Yippee. Correct, there in lies the 64 dollar question. Who would be the best to lead that type of challenging endeavor for our WBB? From a head coach/coaching staff point of view, Tim Burke comes across to me as a nice genuine guy but I don't think he has the necessary skill set to lead this type of thing in the lockeroom. He may know his x and o's but seems quite befuddled when it comes to the complexties od culture shaping and maintaining. And as many posters have said before, the moment he said our team has talent defiencies was the moment that confirmed this for me. Yes it's true but true for most other teams as well. The timing, optics and how it was said was brutal. How about giving Rich Stubler or George Cortez an interview for upcoming vacant coaching positions, i.e., basically for any position as our existing coaching staff will be let go at some point during the off season. As for Kyle Walters, he's a hard one to gauge. I would first look at the Asst GM's of other teams and out of work GM's and work from there. If I'm Wade Miller, I'm doing a whole lot of interviewing to maximize us getting this right.

If management believes we need to win now not in four years.

Yea, but his emotions got the better of him, impacting the team, fanbase and media negatively. Simply showing emotions isn't good enough.

I'm with you on this if he's made available by Calgary and we bring in other's to compete. No harm in seeing what he's got. That's what training camps are for.

You do make a good point. I just end up shouting at the TV "why didn't you do that when you were our coach" during the first segment of half time when Randorf comes on with Lapo, and Lapo gushes over the "creative play-calling" of whatever team is winning. Because the pressure isn't there for him and he knows he has no accountability or control tied to this 'creativeness'. It's like how some people are brave behind keyboards but once the keyboard is gone and the light shines on them, they either play neutral, wilt or just simply disappear.

Exactly my predicament. We were over at friends and the game was on, but it was just background noise. I can't remember the last time I've done that. I am stoked about the off season. Plenty to do, lots of decisions, no where but up, right?

If Reilly knows that's true deep down in himself, he would be advised to have a discussion with Matt Dunigan. Whether you like Matt or not, I commend him for talking about this issue and using his own failings, impacts on his family/friends and continued health issues to teach others.

I was being sarcastic with Buck to help make my point. Should have used an appropropriate emoticon. :-)

I have to ask ..why do it? Both Reilly and that org. are taking a serious chance here, IMO. Not to mention the fact that they are in a similar situation to the Bombers as in the season is a right off for all intended purposes. Sit him, make sure he's ready for the 2014 season and build your team around him. Treat the remaining games as a camp to determine who fits well with this QB and the defense to support him. It's sucks if you're paying money to support and watch them but probably better in the long term.

Because we need a QB that can start MOST of the games next season and not one who's going to break after one game. Then you're just going to be bitching again "WHY DON'T WE HAVE A PROPER QB TO BACKUP TATE WHEN HE GETS HURT". Tate is a bandaid....we do NOT need a bandaid at QB. Especially one that tears as easily as he does. Tate should NOT be an option. Totally disagree with this statement. Insert Boltus (or for that matter all our current qb's), inset all the new oline guys we've brought in, insert sandro, insert Bo Smith and you're on to something. But Tate? He's shown enough in this league to warrant more than the label band aid. Saviour no, risk yes, payoff potential, but filler c'mon now. Are you someone who believes Buck Pierce isn't injury prone and shouldn't of been traded? Yea I'm that someone. I post on all the Bomber sites that Buck Pierce isn't injury prone and he got shafted as a starter but no one will listen. Drew Tate and Buck Pierce and where their at in in their respective points in their career is like the tired old cliche, comparing an apple to an orange. I'll ask you a question, are someone who believes that if a QB gets hurt more than once he will predictably become injury prone and be appropriately fiitted with the glass label? With that line of reasoning, I guess we should now right off Reilly in Edmonton, Lulay in BC, Ray in Toronto, Cavillo in Mtl, Mitchell in Calgary. I guess Hufnagel doesn't know what he is doing and should outright release Tate because he's obviously going to follow the same path as Buck Pierce and is just taking up a roster spot. Ironically I'm not even clear on where I stand with Tate talent wise but feel this injury thing is a bit overblown that shouldn't influence us looking at our options at QB with Tate or otherwise. Yes the Buck Pierce experiment did not work out as well as we wanted and yes we don't want to make the same mistake but it can't completely sway us away, be gun shy from other QB's who may have current health issues that they COULD (not for sure) eventually overcome. Think of it this way, it's like trusting someone and that someone burning you bad. Does that mean you should never trust some again? I would suggest no, BUT obviously learn from your experience balanced with not everyone will be that person who burnt your trust. Treat it scenario by scenario each time learning to maximize a positive outcome. Of course this is just my opinion.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Yikes.

Agree.

Or they sucked in practice.

Completly agree. I'm talking off season. That's the frame of mind I'm already in. How depressing.