HardCoreBlue

To go with our organization now saying our plan b or c was always our plan a. Historically this is what most organizations do because their not going to promote a signing as their third choice. I don't believe that for a second. That's why it's called plan a, plan b etc. Everything I've seen from the Bombers was a) Collaros Burris c) Willy Looks like we're moving on to plan b. On the surface, and in theory, the plan of acquiring a vet QB along with a young upstart, has more merit than acquiring a somewhat new, less experienced QB, no matter our personal opinions on said QBs. My point is that the Bombers, regardless of whether you are right about what their actual plan a, b or c is, will not report it that way when it all shakes out. For example, if we land Burris, the presser is not going read we really wanted Collaros, but we did get our second choice, plan b. They will package it so one can infer, assume, that it was one of our option plan A's they had in place. Suttle yet effective difference to ensure their fans don't interpret it as we got our third choice! They have to market it that way, it's a business.

Bad goaltending is something Maurice can only do so much with...... The goal at the beginning of the Chicago game was an old Noel tendency... (throwing the puck carelessly from behind our net in front of it) Against Nashville all I noticed was Pavs sprawling around way out of place and letting a couple of real bad goals in, also noticed that Andrew Ladd is missing and appears to be invisible on the ice. Other frequent issues... Bogosian can't hit the net if his life depended on it, bad hustle from our forwards coming back, Wheeler holding onto the puck to long, Stuart the unsung hero on our team, Setoguchi is invisible, Thorburn should not be on our first two lines and Scheifle in desperate need of getting 15 lbs of man muscle to help prevent him from being pushed around. Lots of the under the radar guys like Trouba, Frolik and Stuart really do have lots of hustle and play hard. Also Montoya definitely should be given a shot at starting job.... Pavs is to streaky and is out of place so frequently and loves to give up the big rebounds. Completely agree with you on this. His happy feet drives me insane. At this level, he makes standard saves look like he just robbed someone of a goal. Maybe that's his way of marketing his ability. I don't think it's working. Lawless wrote a while back on the dependency the coaching staff have with Buff and the need to wean off that. I think he was right but chose the wrong player. I know a lot of teams struggle with consistent goaltending but it shouldn't stop the Jets at seriously looking at alternatives and trying it out, whether it means giving more starts to Montoya or looking elsewhere. I really don't see this as only defensive scheme issue. Something Pavs said disturbed me when he commented about the coaching change, he said the new coach talks about what great players they are. If that's what he believes has been the significant influencing issue with the inconsistency of his play, then I say Wow really? Me thinks not.

To go with our organization now saying our plan b or c was always our plan a. Historically this is what most organizations do because their not going to promote a signing as their third choice.

How do you do that exactly?

I'm not trying to be crass nor overly simplistic but I would think this is one of the many areas where our scouting team needs to deliver.

For the love of God, whatever God you may or may not believe in, please stop.

When you look at the teams he had to beat to get to those grey cups, yeah it kind of does. When you basically have an automatic bye into the Grey Cup because you might have an easy division getting to the game is less of an accomplishment. I mean every time the Bombers had an above .500 season in the east the Als were not in the Grey Cup. You're suggesting AC was 'kind of' a bad QB? I feel obligated to say this on behalf of anyone (whether I like them or not) who has proven themselves over and over again, that's an extremely ridiculous uninformed statement, it really is. You sound more sour grapes than anything. He's a guaranteed HoF.

??? Nothing wrong except that he could have at least tried to play the field. Anyway, with what we now know about Mack, I don't think it would have mattered anyway, Seleepy Joe wouldn't have got the job done anyway, even if Reilly had given us a shot at signing him in FA. I think that players need to look at all options and do what is best for them. In that regard I will be sad if Collaros signs with someone else, but I'll understand that he and his agent weighed all options and did what was best. I didn't get that feeling with Reilly, I think he had tunnel vision for Edmonton, and look how that worked out, the guy is lucky to be alive right now. Of course, so is Max Hall. Tunnel vision works both ways. I just hope our team doesn't have tunnel vision with Collaros, an overall unproven commodity. It takes away from the investment, energy and focus needed to recruit, scout and sign other potential QB's.

Ouch. At least they acted (whether it was AC throwing or Cahoon catching) like they've done it before. I can't remember Cahoon or AC ever celebrating a seven-yard pass and catch toss unless it was a game winner. They were professionals in the true sense of the word. Personality wise, if your suggesting more colour that's not they way they were wired, can't change much of that.

I was more amused by the reporter and her reaction. Caught her off guard, her expression was priceless. She looked annoyed, didn't get that canned response she was looking for. I love it when an athlete now and then breaks away from script, makes for good tv.

well, they were not in the sweepstakes from the beginning. they got BLM who is better than Collaros and 2 vet backups in Tate and McPherson. A few possoble scenarios would be that Hufnagel either believes a little bit more in Tate that some posters I've read here, or it's simply an insurance tactic or a bargaining chip to use with other teams.

A perfect case study to look at when debating the merits of building through the draft versus the merits of building through free agency were the tenure's of Tambellini (Oilers) and Feaster (Flames).

When you say veteran can that be interpreted as talented? And when we look at QB prospects with the appropriate skill sets for the CFL coupled with potentially willing/wanting to play in the CFL, is the well dry? Because if Collaros does indeed command a higher than normal salary based on what he's shown and delivered in this league than that tells me the team that takes him thinks this is the case and is desperate.

Maybe, or you'll see him two/three games in retire as an Alouettes and move into their coaching team.

You may be right but based on my observations being around the eskiblows far to much is he'd consider that a strength of his.

If it's Miles, it will be defensive coordinating by committee with O'Shea's background and all. What makes you say that? Just because O'S used to be a linebacker? He's never coached positionally before, let alone coordinated a defense. Despite that, the sense I'm getting from him anyways, is that he is the type to just let his guys do their jobs. He'll have his plate full enough. True but by your logic O'Shea shouldn't be a head coach either just because he's been a special teams coordinator. As well, coaching by committee can work if done appropriately. It's not about the head coach wearing multiple hats (like lapo did with his head coaching duties and the offense), it's about the coaching team actually operating as high performing team where each individual knows when to lead, knows when to follow and knows when the get the he'll out of the way. All coaches need to be receptive to other coaches inputs but not obligated to enact it. O'Shea can provide input and empower his coaches. It can be done if he has that special skill set to do it. That's not my logic at all. I'm not saying that Miles shouldn't be a DC. I'm also not saying that "coaching by committee" doesn't work. What I am saying is that we have a rookie HC that will be busy instilling his own culture and philosophies into this team. He should be working hard at building a coaching staff that can run their departments effectively. O'Shea is not in a position to be worrying about involving himself with the defense, regardless if he would be qualified to do so or not. I can't remember writing that you said Miles shouldn't be a DC. Originally you questioned my logic on O'Shea taking more of a part in our DC and I felt, based on what you wrote, you weren't being consistent then with your thought process when looking at other individuals. The obvious point you make, at least to me, is yes he needs to hire coaches to run their areas competently and effectively. If that wasn't the case, then oh boy we're in trouble. I didn't suggest O'Shea should be worrying about involving himself with the defense, I simply suggested, based on Miles coaching experience, along with my interpretations of what I've seen from him so far, is once the rubber hits the road, he will probably play a more significant role in how we lay out our defensive strategies. But, ultimately, taking the philosophy of empowering his coaches as the main decision makers in their respective departments. At the end of the day, I guess it's the mindset one takes when coaching by committee. If the worry and micro manager factor is enacted, then it is no longer a team approach and ultimately will fail. But if it's more of a, 'hey, here's my input based on my experience, what I've seen, expertise etc, hope it helps' then more chance for success. This actually fits nicely into your point of instilling a certain type of culture knowing it's not his culture, it's about him trying to provide some direction and model what it needs to look like for this team to be successful. This to me is what sets a great head coach apart from a good head coach. A good example, although not football, would be the head coach of the Nashville Predators, Barry Trotz. My educated guess is that his shelf life is not a result of his control over all on-ice hockey decisions and/or his specific x's and o's hockey knowledge, it's signficatly based on his keen ability to lead/inflluence a type of culture individuals connected to that organization subscribe too and resonate with.

If it's Miles, it will be defensive coordinating by committee with O'Shea's background and all. What makes you say that? Just because O'S used to be a linebacker? He's never coached positionally before, let alone coordinated a defense. The True but by your logic O'Shea shouldn't be a head coach either just because he's been a special teams coordinator. As well, coaching by committee can work if done appropriately. It's not about the head coach wearing multiple hats (like lapo did with his head coaching duties and the offense), it's about the coaching team actually operating as high performing team where each individual knows when to lead, knows when to follow and knows when the get the he'll out of the way. All coaches need to be receptive to other coaches inputs but not obligated to enact it. O'Shea can provide input and empower his coaches. It can be done if he has that special skill set to do it. Despite that, the sense I'm getting from him anyways, is that he is the type to just let his guys do their jobs. He'll have his plate full enough. If it's Miles, it will be defensive coordinating by committee with O'Shea's background and all. What makes you say that? Just because O'S used to be a linebacker? He's never coached positionally before, let alone coordinated a defense. Despite that, the sense I'm getting from him anyways, is that he is the type to just let his guys do their jobs. He'll have his plate full enough.

If it's Miles, it will be defensive coordinating by committee with O'Shea's background and all.

Sort of. Although how do we know Stubler chose Calgary over us? Maybe we said no thanks after the interview process. Unless of course I missed a press release that says otherwise.

Not total. Keeping 20% of last years 'concepts'. Let's hope 'concepts' being score some g*d damn touchdowns.

If I was Winnipeg, I wouldn't be trying to trade for competition for Collaros. The big selling point we have over other teams at the moment is that he would be the clear cut starter. Start acquiring pieces to compete with him and all of a sudden, we're no different than Hamilton or Montreal. I would find it odd that if we land Collaros we would annoint him our starting QB prior to training camp. There has to be a little push on him to deliver AND we need depth. I would also hope that if we weren't able to land Collaros, our brain trust doesn't throw up their hands and say 'now what?'

To me and based on history it makes sense that Paul Lapolice may have determined it wasn't a good fit for him in BC regardless of his TSN employment. IF Wally Buono still has direct decision-making powers over on-field gameday strategies/direction, it has the potential to lead to conflict. When Mr. Lapolice was here, he did seem to come across as someone who needed a high level of control (See OC) which ironically may not reasonate completely with Mr. Buono. For LaPo to be consistently successful as a coach at any level (he knows his x's and o's for sure), my observations tell me he needs to work on empowering people around him and relinquishing control as appropriate.

Oh that's who you played for in high school. Makes sense now. Well, I played on a baseball team called the switch hitters, it was awesome. The other teams so enjoyed us.

Well, sometimes the challenge is the incentive and possibly more opportunities to evolve his career.

"The Bombers do have players with a ton of talent, he said, though he noted you can’t see character on tape – or measure the effect of lack of confidence'. From the freep. Well said, let's hope he's a good judge. Good first impression.