Dascow Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 This hire is giving me flash backs to the countless times Marcel kept putting Boltus back in there for 2nd and short situations, despite that fact that it was obvious to everyone, except Marcel, that boltus was awful at it. Game after game he kept putting him back in and game after game we would do a collective face palm. It was so bloody obvious, (and easy to fix.), and yet it was never corrected. This hire really concerns me. Fred C Dobbs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 This hire is giving me flash backs to the countless times Marcel kept putting Boltus back in there for 2nd and short situations, despite that fact that it was obvious to everyone, except Marcel, that boltus was awful at it. Game after game he kept putting him back in and game after game we would do a collective face palm. It was so bloody obvious, (and easy to fix.), and yet it was never corrected. This hire really concerns me. He kept putting him in there because Burke refused to let Goltz play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I don't know why people are going nuts... Without cortez available, who did we think was in the running? Plus the more you look at it, khari has been heavily influenced by both lapo and MB so whatever, I'm fine with this... As long as boltus is cut, ahem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 It wouldnt surprise me if MB's hands were tied on some things this past season, so I wouldn't hang Boltus on him (aside from their past relationship). I messaged someone yesterday and said the rumour was MB was staying and the reply was "No way, he hated it here". So obviously something changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan007 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Kirk Penton @PentonKirk18h #Bombers name Marcel Bellefeuille their offensive co-ordinator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jpan85 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I can never get out of my mind MB and the Riders running over us in the 2003 West Semi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I really would like clarity on the whole Boltus and Goltz situation . if they hated Goltz so much then why didn't they cut him? Why wasn't Brown doing qb sneaks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Ask Tim Burke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dascow Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Is there something I missed? Why do you guys think it was Tim Burke making that call and not Marcel? Was that ever stated anywhere? Because normally the offensive co-ordinator is going to send in the short yardage team. And normally it's the offensive co-ordinator that will decide which players are in the short yardage package. That's what makes him the O-Co. You know...co-ordinating offence and stuff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownabomberfan Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I really would like clarity on the whole Boltus and Goltz situation . if they hated Goltz so much then why didn't they cut him? Why wasn't Brown doing qb sneaks? Yeah actually that would be cool to see Doug Brown come out of retirement just to do QB sneaks. We'd get 5 yards every time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Yeah Dascow, who knows.? Burke & that coaching staff was totally ******. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan007 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I really would like clarity on the whole Boltus and Goltz situation . if they hated Goltz so much then why didn't they cut him? Why wasn't Brown doing qb sneaks? Yeah actually that would be cool to see Doug Brown come out of retirement just to do QB sneaks. We'd get 5 yards every time! Ok the Dickenson screw up was funny because you didn't do it on purpose. Now you're just milking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyOnTheSpot Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I really would like clarity on the whole Boltus and Goltz situation . if they hated Goltz so much then why didn't they cut him? I know they thought that Goltz gave up so that's why he wasn't playing. As to why he wasn't cut I can only assume they thought the greater punishment was to spend a cold fall here not playing than to pay out his contract and let him soak up the California sun at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Is there something I missed? Why do you guys think it was Tim Burke making that call and not Marcel? Was that ever stated anywhere? Because normally the offensive co-ordinator is going to send in the short yardage team. And normally it's the offensive co-ordinator that will decide which players are in the short yardage package. That's what makes him the O-Co. You know...co-ordinating offence and stuff... If Burke said he didn't want him playing...you think MB would go against that? This was not the first time Burke had said a player would no longer be playing or performing in a certain position due to a mistake. Burke was pissed at Goltz because he was pouting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBURGESS Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Ask Tim Burke. Folks keep saying that Tim Burke made the decision not to use Goltz, but I kinda doubt that's true. Burke had a hands off policy when it came to the offense. If anyone hates Goltz, and I don't think anyone does, it's the OC, who more than likely made the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dascow Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Is there something I missed? Why do you guys think it was Tim Burke making that call and not Marcel? Was that ever stated anywhere? Because normally the offensive co-ordinator is going to send in the short yardage team. And normally it's the offensive co-ordinator that will decide which players are in the short yardage package. That's what makes him the O-Co. You know...co-ordinating offence and stuff... If Burke said he didn't want him playing...you think MB would go against that? This was not the first time Burke had said a player would no longer be playing or performing in a certain position due to a mistake. Burke was pissed at Goltz because he was pouting. The whole "Burke didn't want him playing" is nothing but conjecture, unless you can show me some kind of proof otherwise. If Burke didn't want him playing then why keep him on the roster? The Bombers had other options at QB. Putting Boltus in there was a detriment to the team and any O-Co worth their salt would have realized that and made efforts to change that. That decision in my mind is on the OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Is there something I missed? Why do you guys think it was Tim Burke making that call and not Marcel? Was that ever stated anywhere? Because normally the offensive co-ordinator is going to send in the short yardage team. And normally it's the offensive co-ordinator that will decide which players are in the short yardage package. That's what makes him the O-Co. You know...co-ordinating offence and stuff... If Burke said he didn't want him playing...you think MB would go against that? This was not the first time Burke had said a player would no longer be playing or performing in a certain position due to a mistake. Burke was pissed at Goltz because he was pouting. The whole "Burke didn't want him playing" is nothing but conjecture, unless you can show me some kind of proof otherwise. If Burke didn't want him playing then why keep him on the roster? The Bombers had other options at QB. Putting Boltus in there was a detriment to the team and any O-Co worth their salt would have realized that and made efforts to change that. That decision in my mind is on the OC. Why can"t it be both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dascow Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Is there something I missed? Why do you guys think it was Tim Burke making that call and not Marcel? Was that ever stated anywhere? Because normally the offensive co-ordinator is going to send in the short yardage team. And normally it's the offensive co-ordinator that will decide which players are in the short yardage package. That's what makes him the O-Co. You know...co-ordinating offence and stuff... If Burke said he didn't want him playing...you think MB would go against that? This was not the first time Burke had said a player would no longer be playing or performing in a certain position due to a mistake. Burke was pissed at Goltz because he was pouting. The whole "Burke didn't want him playing" is nothing but conjecture, unless you can show me some kind of proof otherwise. If Burke didn't want him playing then why keep him on the roster? The Bombers had other options at QB. Putting Boltus in there was a detriment to the team and any O-Co worth their salt would have realized that and made efforts to change that. That decision in my mind is on the OC. Why can"t it be both? It could very well be both. That doesn't exonerate Marcel in any way though, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Here's my take: It was Burke that was pissed at Goltz for not being able to save his skin but it was Marcel that was in love with Boltus and kept throwing him out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Here's my take: It was Burke that was pissed at Goltz for not being able to save his skin but it was Marcel that was in love with Boltus and kept throwing him out there. Like I already said .... If Boltus is back at training camp then that is a huge red flag voodoochylde and Floyd 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dascow Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 Here's my take: It was Burke that was pissed at Goltz for not being able to save his skin but it was Marcel that was in love with Boltus and kept throwing him out there. I am thinking along the same lines as you are. Whatever the situation with Goltz and Burke was, it is sort of irrelevant because Boltus could have also been cut at any time and replaced by Brown. But Marcel never did that. He stuck with his guy despite Boltus' obvious short comings. That scares me that something that obvious was never addressed. I agree with you Brandon, if Boltus is back at training camp, that is a big red flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlue Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I really would like clarity on the whole Boltus and Goltz situation . if they hated Goltz so much then why didn't they cut him? I know they thought that Goltz gave up so that's why he wasn't playing. As to why he wasn't cut I can only assume they thought the greater punishment was to spend a cold fall here not playing than to pay out his contract and let him soak up the California sun at home. Surely you jest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I guess we all have our own opinion on this Goltz matter. Just going by his nature and iron-fist approach, I'm voting it was Burke who denied Goltz any further playing time. It's a juvenile approach to coaching but that seemed to be in his character. After all, he made such a big deal of Goltz's tie and cuff-links routine. And as to cutting him, they couldn't cut their only other experienced guy. And Boltus? Good gawd, I guess it was MB who would tried him out and stuck with him, but if he can't see by now, that that is a loss of downs right there, well…. I think we were stuck with Boltus seeing as Goltz wasn't an option. I just can't see any of our QBs here in TC, except Hall, providing of course, that we do get a starter. Even then… blitzmore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I hope Hall comes back as he did improve. That being said, I hope Boltus & Goltz are gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jpan85 Posted December 18, 2013 Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 I was told that Goltz did not see the field in the last few weeks because they did not trust his decision making at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now