Aww, did I hurt your feelings? Play better. 

Most coaches that are fired seem to be going into their last year on their contracts. That being said, how do you as Wade Miller sell the idea of a new contract to the fans for Mike O'Shea? I think it's impossible without an appearance in the Grey Cup. 

17 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Most coaches that are fired seem to be going into their last year on their contracts. That being said, how do you as Wade Miller sell the idea of a new contract to the fans for Mike O'Shea? I think it's impossible without an appearance in the Grey Cup. 

We need a stern disciplinarian as head coach. This "player's coach" crap is sickening. We play undisciplined (bad penalties, blown assignments), our players seem to have a sense of entitlement whether they deserve it or not (Nichols), and we haven't played a 60 minute football game since seemingly forever. Enough.

edit

 

Edited September 3, 20187 yr by Mark F

1 hour ago, J5V said:

We need a stern disciplinarian as head coach. This "player's coach" crap is sickening. 

You mean like Mike Riley who coached us to a Grey Cup win? 

We don't need a disciplinarian, we just need a good competent coach who isn't afraid to shake things up occasionally.

20 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Most coaches that are fired seem to be going into their last year on their contracts. That being said, how do you as Wade Miller sell the idea of a new contract to the fans for Mike O'Shea? I think it's impossible without an appearance in the Grey Cup. 

I think a home play off win, and a good effort in the final could do wonder for that. I also think we are going to see significant scapegoating of nichols, possibly plop and definitely hall. 

1 hour ago, blueingreenland said:

You mean like Mike Riley who coached us to a Grey Cup win? 

We don't need a disciplinarian, we just need a good competent coach who isn't afraid to shake things up occasionally.

To be honest i dont think you can have disciplinarian coaches like you used to. I remember teams going back to 2 a days mid week. Full padded contact practices in the heat/cold etc etc. 

1) I think the CFLPA has pushed out a coaches ability to be a real hard ass. 2) I dont think the modern generation of athlete (or in general) responds to that. I think you need to be a different type of leader today as a coach.  

1 hour ago, blueingreenland said:

You mean like Mike Riley who coached us to a Grey Cup win? 

We don't need a disciplinarian, we just need a good competent coach who isn't afraid to shake things up occasionally.

I think today’s players tune out an old school, red faced, screaming disciplinarian type - like Ditka. But, I think you need a coach who is clear that if you don’t play well, or your back up is playing better, you sit. O’Shea is not that. Way too loyal. 

A successful HC is only as good as his assistants.....historically look at the entire staff of Grey Cup winning teams.

12 hours ago, DR. CFL said:

A successful HC is only as good as his assistants.....historically look at the entire staff of Grey Cup winning teams.

A good HC surrounds himself with good assistants.  A good HC has his replacement on staff, or maybe even more than one of them.  He is comfortable in his own abilities and doesn't feel intimidated that he may be replaced.  Drive it like you stole it. 

I will give Nichol's credit for one thing, he stood up there and owned it after the game.  His body language showed someone that can see the ice is getting thin around them.  It wasn't everyone else's fault this week.  I see the Riders focusing on the run this week, Brooks being back will make a big difference.  I think its now or never time for Nichols, I don't see any teams lining up to pay him 400 plus the way he is playing.  I actually see the Bombers shifting things this week to more of a passing attack.  I think Nichols will bounce back and play better this week

On 2018-09-04 at 8:20 AM, Ripper said:

I will give Nichol's credit for one thing, he stood up there and owned it after the game.  His body language showed someone that can see the ice is getting thin around them.  It wasn't everyone else's fault this week.  I see the Riders focusing on the run this week, Brooks being back will make a big difference.  I think its now or never time for Nichols, I don't see any teams lining up to pay him 400 plus the way he is playing.  I actually see the Bombers shifting things this week to more of a passing attack.  I think Nichols will bounce back and play better this week

From your last two posts it would appear you have become quite an expert on this site twisting the knife while wanting to give the impression you are sympathetic to our cause.  I for one do not appreciate your comments here.  Your gloating under the guise of honest analysis wears thin.  I stay our off your site so why don't you do the same.  Yeah, I'm a little touchy right now and will read and accept critical comments from our posters but I kind of wish you would buzz off.

55 minutes ago, LeBird said:

Yeah, I'm a little touchy right now and will read and accept critical comments from our posters but I kind of wish you would buzz off.

part of the Matt Nichols hurt feelings club??    it's sports. gotta deal with the good and the bad.

1 hour ago, LeBird said:

From your last two posts it would appear you have become quite an expert on this site twisting the knife while wanting to give the impression you are sympathetic to our cause.  I for one do not appreciate your comments here.  Your gloating under the guise of honest analysis wears thin.  I stay our off your site so why don't you do the same.  Yeah, I'm a little touchy right now and will read and accept critical comments from our posters but I kind of wish you would buzz off.

I am not turning the knife. I am not posting what I really think about Nichols.  I think some here are really bothered by the fact that a lot of things I have said in previous arguments here may be a lot more true than some want to admit or face up to.  There is nothing in what I said that is gloating.  If you took it that way, oh well.  

 As far as the HC comments, I think it is a fair point. Our own HC Jones surrounded himself with yes men and doesn't have a replacement on his own staff so i obviously wasn't talking about the Riders.

Edited September 5, 20187 yr by Ripper

Personally I believe a coach can be a "player's" coach as well as a disciplinarian. The biggest asset any coach can have is an ability to communicate to the players and his staff. In that communication he has to make sure they (referring to all including coaches) understand the standards he expects of them and the consequences should they not be met. Unfortunately I believe MOS can communicate with his players and his staff but unfortunately has not been able to communicate the standard expected or the consequences if not achieved. Instead he seems to defend in public for sure but not sure in the room or the coach's offices. This I believe is the big problem. I have seen coaches over the years who are both player coaches (Riley for one) and disciplinarian (Murphy for example) and then some that were both (slot in Grant). They were all successful and I think it was because they followed through with the consequences. Setting short term and long term goals for players and the team itself is standard coaching 101 but in setting them they have to be realistic, attainable and consequential. I haven't seen that from MOS to date.

On 2018-09-03 at 6:29 PM, M.Silverback said:

 But, I think you need a coach who is clear that if you don’t play well, or your back up is playing better, you sit. O’Shea is not that. Way too loyal. 

But O'Shea does sit guys who aren't playing well. Case in point Poop Johnson got taken out. People bitched about lankford over Washington but we saw that Washington in the last game wasn't ready. They sent Bowman packing for Thompkins already too. So I really don't see this refuses to sit out his favourites if there is a better option at back up guy some people like to say is there. I think it's just easy for fans to say "well play the backup! That will fix everything!"

Edited September 5, 20187 yr by 17to85

21 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

But O'Shea does sit guys who aren't playing well. Case in point Poop Johnson got taken out. People bitched about lankford over Washington but we saw that Washington in the last game wasn't ready. They sent Bowman packing for Thompkins already too. So I really don't see this refuses to sit out his favourites if there is a better option at back up guy some people like to say is there. I think it's just easy for fans to say "well play the backup! That will fix everything!"

Man your posts are terrible - we should put your backup in.

1 hour ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

Personally I believe a coach can be a "player's" coach as well as a disciplinarian. The biggest asset any coach can have is an ability to communicate to the players and his staff. In that communication he has to make sure they (referring to all including coaches) understand the standards he expects of them and the consequences should they not be met. Unfortunately I believe MOS can communicate with his players and his staff but unfortunately has not been able to communicate the standard expected or the consequences if not achieved. Instead he seems to defend in public for sure but not sure in the room or the coach's offices. This I believe is the big problem. I have seen coaches over the years who are both player coaches (Riley for one) and disciplinarian (Murphy for example) and then some that were both (slot in Grant). They were all successful and I think it was because they followed through with the consequences. Setting short term and long term goals for players and the team itself is standard coaching 101 but in setting them they have to be realistic, attainable and consequential. I haven't seen that from MOS to date.

OBF. At best a theory. Actually a fantasy. 

17 minutes ago, Rod Black said:

OBF. At best a theory. Actually a fantasy. 

Tom Coughlin says high.

But it usually takes years for a coach to become a 'hybrid' like he did. 

On 2018-09-04 at 8:15 AM, Ripper said:

A good HC surrounds himself with good assistants.  A good HC has his replacement on staff, or maybe even more than one of them.  He is comfortable in his own abilities and doesn't feel intimidated that he may be replaced.  Drive it like you stole it. 

@ good hcs have replacements on staff, this is the gospel right here. Though maybe its more like great coaches rather then good. But coaching lineages at any level or side of the border are a huge deal.  Great coaches breed great coaches. And little else does. 

And yeah the coaches every team wants are the type who have the guys who are next to be scooped for HC jobs elsewhere, and they arent threatened by it. Thats how they continually attract the best young talent in position coaches to develop. 

3 hours ago, Eternal optimist said:

Man your posts are terrible - we should put your backup in.

But Noeller isn't really interested in posting, he kinda pulled a Durant.

10 hours ago, trueBlue83 said:

part of the Matt Nichols hurt feelings club??    it's sports. gotta deal with the good and the bad.

Like I wrote in this thread I would like to see a change, temporary or permanent, at the QB position.  And I did admit i might have been wrong about Nichols. 

13 hours ago, 17to85 said:

But Noeller isn't really interested in posting, he kinda pulled a Durant.

But did he get paid?

16 hours ago, 17to85 said:

But O'Shea does sit guys who aren't playing well. Case in point Poop Johnson got taken out. People bitched about lankford over Washington but we saw that Washington in the last game wasn't ready. They sent Bowman packing for Thompkins already too. So I really don't see this refuses to sit out his favourites if there is a better option at back up guy some people like to say is there. I think it's just easy for fans to say "well play the backup! That will fix everything!"

Don't completely buy the "favorites" thing - but, Nichols hasn't played well, for a month.....

22 hours ago, LeBird said:

From your last two posts it would appear you have become quite an expert on this site twisting the knife while wanting to give the impression you are sympathetic to our cause.  I for one do not appreciate your comments here.  Your gloating under the guise of honest analysis wears thin.  I stay our off your site so why don't you do the same.  Yeah, I'm a little touchy right now and will read and accept critical comments from our posters but I kind of wish you would buzz off.

I have no problems with Ripper's posts to say the least -  Me thinks you are being a little too sensitive. If you choose to say off Riderfans.com that is your decision. I post over there all the time and have never had any problems. Give it a rest - it is only a sports game and sports fans website. You should have been around in the old TotalCFL website days if you wanted to see some fur fly! 😁😁

21 hours ago, Ripper said:

I am not turning the knife. I am not posting what I really think about Nichols.  I think some here are really bothered by the fact that a lot of things I have said in previous arguments here may be a lot more true than some want to admit or face up to.  There is nothing in what I said that is gloating.  If you took it that way, oh well.  

 As far as the HC comments, I think it is a fair point. Our own HC Jones surrounded himself with yes men and doesn't have a replacement on his own staff so i obviously wasn't talking about the Riders.

QFT

Many here are in denial - and I call them wanna-be fans... Even with the current evidence before them, there are lots of comments about how the team is loaded with talent and Walters and OShea are CFL legends who have done nothing but bring perfection to the team... Just fire Hall and replace Nichols and all will be well. That is the easy answer because it is a doable solution that does not violate the basic wanna-be tenant that the team is mostly excellent with just a small tweak and they are somehow on the cusp of a massive Bomber dynasty. LOL Will it work? I highly doubt so!

There is nothing wrong with this positive outlook, even with such an excessive viewpoint. It boils down to an extreme case of wishful thinking. However, many of the wanna-be's get upset to the point of irrationality when they are faced with reality which deviates from their wishful model. They lash out childishly at anyone who points out a picture that does not match their mental model of perfection of this current incarnation of the team. Bullying here and terse comments are pervasive. To protest it, that is why I have adopted the Mike Kelly persona and will always point out the other side of the argument that the wanna-be's make.