Riders at Bombers early chat

[M.Silverback]

19 hours ago, GCn20 said:

That's what these guys here who profess to have played the game don't have a hot clue about when it comes to coaching. I suppose selfish, me first players might see it differently but they generally have very short careers. Guys who are truly professional and put the team first have no issues whatsoever with coaches that reward hard work and effort and it absolutely is key to building a winning culture. If you want to reward talent over character all the time you will have the Craig Dickenson RIders. A team full of me first guys that cannot win. Easy for us armchair coaches to sit back and say Player X is marginally more talented than Player Z and therefore that should be the only consideration, and that's why we are not professional coaches, because if that's your only consideration when making the lineup you will be the worst coach in CFL history.

I coached for many years and had an open door policy with my players. Had hundreds of discussions with players about lineups and who was starting who wasn't. The overwhelming majority of concerns that players had if I was making a lineup wasn't about me dressing/starting a lesser talent. Quite the opposite, players would come to me and tell me so and so isn't working hard and his backup is busting his nuts, you should dress that guy instead. Players value other players putting in the work, and for the most part, their talent level is less important. That is as true a locker room statement as there is. Anyone saying different is either lying about being in a dressing room, or is oblivious and the guy that other players were saying should sit.

Over the years I've had the opportunity to speak to a lot of JT's team mates. To a man they view him as their Rudy Reuttiger because he gives 100% all the time. That being said, he probably gets more reps than he should at this point in his career, but playing him is not as big an issue as some here make it out to be. He's a glue guy.

I coached youth football for years, so I am definitely not an expert, or close, on anything related to football. But, the best teams I coached had the most talented players. Full stop. It was a bonus if those players also were "character, good in the room" guys, but often were not. And often the "character" players were great as back ups or positive energy bench guys. I posted before, a pro team can't be full of only narcissistic a-holes. But it needs elite talent, and if some of them are, that's why you're a pro coach! To manage egos, conflict, talent. This Bombers team is really lacking in elite talent. How many will make the all CFL team, or even West division all star team? The blame is shared between Walters, who has fallen asleep at the wheel, and Osh who seems to think character trumps talent. This is the least fun Bombers team to watch I've seen in 20 years. 

[wbbfan]

1 hour ago, Bigblue204 said:

Yeah you can't be a glue guy if you're not performing. Part of what makes a glue guy work is leading by example.

A great example of a glue guy, imo, is Sheed. He wasn't a top 3 WR, and he didn't need to be. He was the last imp wr on the roster, but after some early career struggles, was as reliable as can be, blocked his ass off, ran the sweep, and did all the little things extremely well. He was also a tremendous character guy, a leader, and a culture setter. 

 Early on when he was fighting his hands he was on the verge of getting cut. And when we got to a point where we needed to save money and develop more young wrs he was gone. Imo, he was gone a bit too soon. But he brought a lot while he was here. You don't need that guy, but you sure are glad to have him when hes here. 

[HardCoreBlue]

Just now, wbbfan said:

A great example of a glue guy, imo, is Sheed. He wasn't a top 3 WR, and he didn't need to be. He was the last imp wr on the roster, but after some early career struggles, was as reliable as can be, blocked his ass off, ran the sweep, and did all the little things extremely well. He was also a tremendous character guy, a leader, and a culture setter. 

 Early on when he was fighting his hands he was on the verge of getting cut. And when we got to a point where we needed to save money and develop more young wrs he was gone. Imo, he was gone a bit too soon. But he brought a lot while he was here. You don't need that guy, but you sure are glad to have him when hes here. 

Some people are just wired more than others to lead, to influence, to set the right vibe, to be the glue but all have to perform and if glue teammates stop performing they quickly outstay their welcome in any work environment. The advantage one sometimes have over non-sport environments is one can move the glue guy who can't perform anymore to the level needed into coaching/management positions. MOS has made it known though that players like JT have earned the right to go out on their own in ending their playing careers. Like I said my guess is MOS wants his legacy to reflect loyalty and respect to players who earned their stripes. Admirable. Comes with some opposite effects as does most decisions we make in life.

[wbbfan]

5 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Some people are just wired more than others to lead, to influence, to set the right vibe, to be the glue but all have to perform and if glue teammates stop performing they quickly outstay their welcome in any work environment. The advantage one sometimes have over non-sport environments is one can move the glue guy who can't perform anymore to the level needed into coaching/management positions. MOS has made it known though that players like JT have earned the right to go out on their own in ending their playing careers. Like I said my guess is MOS wants his legacy to reflect loyalty and respect to players who earned their stripes. Admirable. Comes with some opposite effects as does most decisions we make in life.

I don't think legacy plays into the picture at all. I don't think Mos has thought about his legacy for a second. I suspect he thinks this is the best way to win. All you need is football IQ and character.  But football has one of the biggest advantages in sport towards athleticism and raw talent. When you deprive your self of those factors, you hurt your chances to win. 

You need those guys to balance out a roster, but it's like building a house out of nothing but mortar. No bricks, no boards. 

 

If you look at our roster by position groups, how many positions do we have 1 player can go out and just dominantly win a snap 1on1 with the opposition? Imo, wilson with some regularity, a couple ol with no regularity at all, lawson/woods with no regularity at all, wj same, vaval and nichols. When I look at Hamilton's offence alone, I see more guys who can do that with far greater regularity. When I look at the riders, I see significantly more on each side of the ball than we have on our roster, and again with far greater regularity. 

 People look at that and will blame Walters and the front office. But I see us sitting and cutting guys who can do that and become guys who do that with regularity for guys who can't do that and won't become that. 

[sweep the leg]

34 minutes ago, M.Silverback said:

I coached youth football for years, so I am definitely not an expert, or close, on anything related to football. But, the best teams I coached had the most talented players. Full stop. It was a bonus if those players also were "character, good in the room" guys, but often were not. And often the "character" players were great as back ups or positive energy bench guys. I posted before, a pro team can't be full of only narcissistic a-holes. But it needs elite talent, and if some of them are, that's why you're a pro coach! To manage egos, conflict, talent. This Bombers team is really lacking in elite talent. How many will make the all CFL team, or even West division all star team? The blame is shared between Walters, who has fallen asleep at the wheel, and Osh who seems to think character trumps talent. This is the least fun Bombers team to watch I've seen in 20 years. 

I’ve also coached for a long time and agree with this take. The competitive players want to win. They’d prefer the other starters not be lazy assholes, but in the end they mostly just want the best team on the field. 

[Goalie]

Playing the hockey the long time hence the sentence structure and weird ramblings at times. We played with no helmets just for fun. Ok no but anyways. 
 

character matters but you know what the best teams I was on, the teams who won, who wooped some ass and dominated tournaments in Minnesota even once out of 3 trips down there lol, them boys eat differently there, but those best teams had all sorts of assholes on it. But they was the talented assholes. But then like drugs got some. Just saying. Not me. I’m k OA 

Edited 2 hours ago by Goalie

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, sweep the leg said:

I’ve also coached for a long time and agree with this take. The competitive players want to win. They’d prefer the other starters not be lazy assholes, but in the end they mostly just want the best team on the field. 

The players want the best players on the field so long as they put the team first. If you are not doing that you will be a locker room pariah. I am going to say this as gently as I can, anyone thinking differently has not coached any level of serious ball. Pop Warner players might accept lazy and me first guys, but truly competitive ball calls for TEAM and players will not appreciate guys who do not put the team first.  Maybe shitty teams and shitty coaches will out of desperation but that is truly why that happens. Players want the best players on the field despite attitude only when the losses start mounting, until then they want to protect the culture in their room. 

2 hours ago, M.Silverback said:

I coached youth football for years, so I am definitely not an expert, or close, on anything related to football. But, the best teams I coached had the most talented players. Full stop. It was a bonus if those players also were "character, good in the room" guys, but often were not. And often the "character" players were great as back ups or positive energy bench guys. I posted before, a pro team can't be full of only narcissistic a-holes. But it needs elite talent, and if some of them are, that's why you're a pro coach! To manage egos, conflict, talent. This Bombers team is really lacking in elite talent. How many will make the all CFL team, or even West division all star team? The blame is shared between Walters, who has fallen asleep at the wheel, and Osh who seems to think character trumps talent. This is the least fun Bombers team to watch I've seen in 20 years. 

Youth are quite different from adults. They don't know any better. Teenagers want the most popular guys on the field and it doesn't matter what their attitude is. You learn differently as you mature.

2 hours ago, wbbfan said:

A great example of a glue guy, imo, is Sheed. He wasn't a top 3 WR, and he didn't need to be. He was the last imp wr on the roster, but after some early career struggles, was as reliable as can be, blocked his ass off, ran the sweep, and did all the little things extremely well. He was also a tremendous character guy, a leader, and a culture setter. 

 Early on when he was fighting his hands he was on the verge of getting cut. And when we got to a point where we needed to save money and develop more young wrs he was gone. Imo, he was gone a bit too soon. But he brought a lot while he was here. You don't need that guy, but you sure are glad to have him when hes here. 

Exactly right. Sheed is a perfect example of a lesser talent having a much bigger impact than his stats. He left a big hole in the dressing room when he left.

[Tracker]

2 hours ago, wbbfan said:

I don't think legacy plays into the picture at all. I don't think Mos has thought about his legacy for a second. I suspect he thinks this is the best way to win. All you need is football IQ and character.  But football has one of the biggest advantages in sport towards athleticism and raw talent. When you deprive your self of those factors, you hurt your chances to win. 

You need those guys to balance out a roster, but it's like building a house out of nothing but mortar. No bricks, no boards. 

 

If you look at our roster by position groups, how many positions do we have 1 player can go out and just dominantly win a snap 1on1 with the opposition? Imo, wilson with some regularity, a couple ol with no regularity at all, lawson/woods with no regularity at all, wj same, vaval and nichols. When I look at Hamilton's offence alone, I see more guys who can do that with far greater regularity. When I look at the riders, I see significantly more on each side of the ball than we have on our roster, and again with far greater regularity. 

 People look at that and will blame Walters and the front office. But I see us sitting and cutting guys who can do that and become guys who do that with regularity for guys who can't do that and won't become that. 

I disagree- I thonk that O'Shea is projecting his unwillingness to accept when he was given his final cut and is hanging onto aging/fading players as displacement of his own unfinished business.

[kelownabomberfan]

On 2025-10-14 at 7:17 AM, Noeller said:

Last I checked, the weather appeared like it'll be a factor as well on Friday night...

Might have to rename the weather "Jabari Arthur" for tonight....