iso_55 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Don't feel like being an internet detective to talk to you Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair GM Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Stala was unemployed for 2 days. Teams still wanted him. We sure undervalue experience here as fans. We ridicule players on other teams yet have overblown expectations for the players on our rosters. It's not talent that's the problem, it's coaching we say. We have guys just waiting for the right coach to bust out & be all stars. Think again... Agree 100% with this. I think we've drank a little too much of Mack's kool-aid in Winnipeg. Experienced, solid veterans have a place on teams. Even free agents. We've just gotten through a year with what I'd call a complete lack of leadership. I don't love me any Stala, but to provide some veteran leadership, to mentor young guys and provide some 5th WR production, I'd have taken him on. iso_55 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Montreal did not sign Stala because they had 'worse NI depth' than us... classic lame forum excuse... They signed him because he is still a good player - Montreal does not NEED NI receivers for their ratio (although we do...) - but Stala is a good pickup that gives them flexbility if they need it. No one is arguing that Stala is the best receiver out there but the guy would have been a good addition, even in terms of leadership, to any team... I would really like to see the bombers get a bit more aggressive than we have been so far - time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBURGESS Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Stala just signed a 2 year deal with Montreal. Wow. I didn't see that coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Montreal's NI receivers are terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.O.A.B. Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Montreal did not sign Stala because they had 'worse NI depth' than us... classic lame forum excuse... They signed him because he is still a good player - Montreal does not NEED NI receivers for their ratio (although we do...) - but Stala is a good pickup that gives them flexbility if they need it. No one is arguing that Stala is the best receiver out there but the guy would have been a good addition, even in terms of leadership, to any team... I would really like to see the bombers get a bit more aggressive than we have been so far - time will tell. for arguments sake... the only decent NI receiver they had is Deslaurier Deslauriers, Eric 2013 MTL 21 316 15 57 0 after him who they got? Ismael Bamba and Kyle Graves who both have 0 catches in 2013 oh yeah, their NI receiving core is deeper than us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Montreal did not sign Stala because they had 'worse NI depth' than us... classic lame forum excuse... They signed him because he is still a good player - Montreal does not NEED NI receivers for their ratio (although we do...) - but Stala is a good pickup that gives them flexbility if they need it. No one is arguing that Stala is the best receiver out there but the guy would have been a good addition, even in terms of leadership, to any team... I would really like to see the bombers get a bit more aggressive than we have been so far - time will tell. Good players don't get benched and then cut... Stala is an ok talent but really not a guy we would need. I'd rather drop the band aid solution cash on the o line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbill2004 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Montreal did not sign Stala because they had 'worse NI depth' than us... classic lame forum excuse... They signed him because he is still a good player - Montreal does not NEED NI receivers for their ratio (although we do...) - but Stala is a good pickup that gives them flexbility if they need it. No one is arguing that Stala is the best receiver out there but the guy would have been a good addition, even in terms of leadership, to any team... I would really like to see the bombers get a bit more aggressive than we have been so far - time will tell. Good players don't get benched and then cut...Stala is an ok talent but really not a guy we would need. I'd rather drop the band aid solution cash on the o line I agree, except who is realistically out there who we can spend money on to improve the OL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigseye Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Right now, Dave Stala is a better NI receiver than what we have, although you could make a case for Watson. He just made the Als a better team and would have done the same for the Bombers if they had signed him. iso_55 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Stala was unemployed for 2 days. Teams still wanted him. We sure undervalue experience here as fans. We ridicule players on other teams yet have overblown expectations for the players on our rosters. It's not talent that's the problem, it's coaching we say. We have guys just waiting for the right coach to bust out & be all stars. Think again... Agree 100% with this. I think we've drank a little too much of Mack's kool-aid in Winnipeg. Experienced, solid veterans have a place on teams. Even free agents. We've just gotten through a year with what I'd call a complete lack of leadership. I don't love me any Stala, but to provide some veteran leadership, to mentor young guys and provide some 5th WR production, I'd have taken him on. I'm no real Stala fan either nor did I expect the Bombers to sign him as he is entrenched as an East Division guy in Ontario & Quebec. I don't think he'd ever come out west. My point was that we need veteran leadership badly on this team. If we have a chance to sign an older player we should take advantage of it. We need character & role player guys as much as we need the young superstars to win. Funny how it seems players on other teams suck yet ours don't. That's what I was talking about Mike. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted January 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Stala signed in Montreal because they lack NI receiver depth and Stala wanted to stay out East. It's that simple. And truthfully, I'd rather have the guys we have coming up in our system and giving them the reps in TC rather than Stala. Also, IMO, both Watson and Etienne have way more upside than Stala, not to mention if we get Kohlert back. blitzmore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 IF... big if Kohlert comes back. Just what we need, Mr Dee. Give more inexperienced players more playing time. We already did that & we went 3-15. I get what you say & don't necessarily disagree with you about playing young guys on our team but we're still way too young at a lot of positions. We need veteran players as well. All I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Montreal signed Stala to essentially replace Lavoie on the roster... Its just funny to read how we kind of dismiss Stala's signing - after only two days on the market - as 'well, they had no depth'... translation: we don't need him... Its been so many years since we've had real competitions at training camp and we're paying for it... Just want to see us bringing in guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted January 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 There is value in getting and playing veteran players, if (there's that if again) they can perform at a level that will compliment or improve your team to a significant degree. That is not Dave Stala. It's ridiculous that we, as a fan forum, covet a known name and disregard the reason they are available. And, by what I read, he wasn't available to us anyways, so there what's the big deal?….There is none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 IF... big if Kohlert comes back. Just what we need, Mr Dee. Give more inexperienced players more playing time. We already did that & we went 3-15. I get what you say & don't necessarily disagree with you about playing young guys on our team but we're still way too young at a lot of positions. We need veteran players as well. All I'm saying. Exactly. We went through a season of letting young guys like Etienne & Kohlert play. Why would we now bring in a broken down old guy who can't run anymore and sit them back on the bench? If this was Stala from a few years ago I'd be for it, but it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 IF... big if Kohlert comes back. Just what we need, Mr Dee. Give more inexperienced players more playing time. We already did that & we went 3-15. I get what you say & don't necessarily disagree with you about playing young guys on our team but we're still way too young at a lot of positions. We need veteran players as well. All I'm saying. No we don't, we need better coaching, better schemes, a QB and a better offensive line. Then you'll see how it won't matter how much experience we have. We don't need Stala. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKAChip Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 That didn't take long at all. Goes to show there is still value there. I guess there was still value in Ahman Green when the Als signed him, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKAChip Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Montreal did not sign Stala because they had 'worse NI depth' than us... classic lame forum excuse... They signed him because he is still a good player - Montreal does not NEED NI receivers for their ratio (although we do...) - but Stala is a good pickup that gives them flexbility if they need it. No one is arguing that Stala is the best receiver out there but the guy would have been a good addition, even in terms of leadership, to any team... I would really like to see the bombers get a bit more aggressive than we have been so far - time will tell. Stala is not a good player anymore. He's had significant injury issues and at 35, he's only getting worse. To say that he would be a leader is laughable considering he's one of the biggest clowns this league has ever seen. To stunt any growth of our young NI recievers to experiment with this guy would be laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKAChip Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 I hear Jason Clermont may also be available... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Technically, we 'stunted the growth' of our young NI receiver by not protecting him in the expansion draft... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPuDS Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Lmao @ people upset we didnt go after stala.. Smh. Im pretty sure walters is fully aware of what he does or doesnt have at this point in hia career.. I also dont think its better then watson and arguably compatible to ettienne and poblah. Im also in the belief kolhert will.be a bomber come feb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Lmao @ people upset we didnt go after stala.. Smh. Im pretty sure walters is fully aware of what he does or doesnt have at this point in hia career.. I also dont think its better then watson and arguably compatible to ettienne and poblah. Im also in the belief kolhert will.be a bomber come feb. I for one never said I wanted Stala .I said simply that we need more veterans on this team to provide leadership on the field & in the locker room & on the field to our young players. Never said it had to be Stala. That's why we were 3-15 last season. Wally Buono couldn't have won with the talent we had last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted January 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 The league has a shortage of veteran QBs. That's probably why Brink, Elliott, Pierce and now Mcpherson have found at least temporary employment. Does Austin have Collaros envy? Over his own stable of young-uns? Maybe. But not without a vet back up I would say. So the question is…would Austin just let Burris go to FA to go after Zach-man? 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. When you say veteran can that be interpreted as talented? Sure, but really what I mean is available. Look at who's been picked up in the last little while….K. Joseph, McPherson, Pierce, Brink and Elliott. That is who has been interpreted, in one way or another, as 'veteran' back up material. 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? No, I don't believe it is at all, with what we've seen as an abundance of new young guys who did rather well in the league last year. There is one team whose record doesn't shine in that regard but I'll keep their name a secret. 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. Really we're the only team that can be regarded as desperate, but there are more answers out there than there's been in awhile so to use the term desperate in acquiring Collaros is not accurate IMO. We have options. Collaros has been noticed and will command a salary that will be fitting for a QB with his limited experience in how his salary will be structured. blitzmore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted January 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 Drew Edwards @scratchingpost @ryanpmaloney I think they like LeFevour, Brom & McGee so I don't see them chasing Collaros. A vet back up would help, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueandgold Posted January 12, 2014 Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 Drew Edwards @scratchingpost @ryanpmaloney I think they like LeFevour, Brom & McGee so I don't see them chasing Collaros. A vet back up would help, though. I'd be shocked if Hamilton went into camp with LeFevour with their starter. But, what this says to me is that Burris is done as a starter. 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