So basically the general thoughts that I have been hearing around this and other Bomber boards as well as from fans of the other teams in the league is that the Bombers are basically the consensus last place team for this season. I realize that most of the time these pre-season predictions are pure garbage and that on paper, the Bombers do have their work cut out for them but looking over the other teams in the league, there are pressing questions for every team based on personnel and why the positions in question for the Bombers are thrust into the limelight while other team's concerns are largely ignored, I'm not entirely sure. It's probably mostly due to the fact that our QB situation is by far the most questionable in the league and that is obviously very important but I'd like to take a moment or two to go through the questionable areas of the other teams in the CFL.

 

Montreal:

 

First of all, I'm not going to say that Calvillo one year older is primed for a decline because we say it all the time and it never happens. It's going to happen one day, but to say it will be this year is very premature. There is no doubt that on offense, these guys are set. At OL, QB, WR/SB and RB there is no real issue. Whitaker had an injury plagued season which could be considered a question mark because of his style of play and Messam isn't an everyday tailback at this point in his career but for now, let's say the RB position is solid. You could make an argument that they need to replace Brian Bratton at WR but Bratton was the epitome of painfully average so I can't imagine even a downgrade of their 4th option is that big a deal.

 

The real questions are at HC and Defense. As far as Dan Hawkins goes, Marc Trestman's success in this league was a large exception to the rule. Popp has proven to be prudent when hiring Head Coaches, but history shows us that rookie Head Coaches rarely step in to immediate success, especially those with no previous CFL experience. I feel like this is something frequently overlooked.

 

On Defence, there are even more questions than the Bombers have had. Let's remember that this was a below average Defense a year ago and they have lost their most steady DB from a year ago in Seth Williams. Other than John Bowman, their D-line is incredibly unproven with A-M Cash, Scooter Berry and Ejiro Kuale by all accounts going from LB to DE. I'm not saying that these guys do not have the potential to be good but with the three of them plus John Bowman coming off a down year, why do these guys get the benefit of the doubt when the Bombers' D-lIne with two proven players in Turner and Hall plus Mainor who has had success in the league has everyone fearing for their lives? Even Gilmore has about as much experience as both of the Montreal DTs for this season.

 

At LB, SAM and MLB are obviously not a concern but with Kyries Hebert moving to WILL, is this really an upgrade over Rod Davis? We all remember how painfully average Hebert was at LB when he was here, and now he's 33 years old and no doubt slower. The secondary probably has the most questions of all. Anderson and Williams are gone, replaced by Geoff Tisdale (who had a terrible year last year) and Byron Parker (who has clearly lost a step and is in the downstroke of his career). Neither of these guys put any fear in my mind. Billy Parker and Jerald Brown have been good but not great players for the Als in the past but they are now 32 and 33 respectively this season and are above the age when DBs begin to decline. It's not like these guys were consistant All-Stars at the position anyway. I am under the impression that at S they are using either M-O Brouilette or Mike Edem. Edem is a raw rookie who has talent, but is still completely green and Brouilette is a special teams guy who I relate to Labbe playing MLB. This should be an exploitable area.

 

My goal for these posts is not to say that these teams are terrible, because they aren't. I just want to point out that every other team in the league has question marks, some have pretty significant ones. I will move on to the Argonauts in my next post.

so as a GM, Obie in Hamilton sucked almost as bad or worse, yet you didn't see sports-writers like ****** Madani or slapnut Zurkowsky bashing Obie on Twitter etc.  I just don't get the excuse that Mack is hated purely for his record, or that he's somehow been some bad guy to the media.  It just doesn't add up.

Obie was well liked & on the whole got along with the media wherever he coached or managed. Mack unlike Obie doesn't cultivate friendships in the media so he's his own worst enemy. He barely talks to them. I still think the disappearing act he did after the LD Sunday loss in Regina last year permanently damaged his relationship with media & the fans. He looked like he was hiding out running scared. Didn't help when the Bombers issued a press release saying Mack would be unavailable until the following Thursday. The optics of the situation looked terrible. It was Mack's choice not to talk & therefore he made his own bed. If he had done damage control after that game things with everyone then things might have been different than they are now. 

Quibbles.

 

Everything you said about Austin's CFL cred can be said about Milanovich but I doubt anyone would say that too.

 

It was Creehan that did most of the alienating here not Cortez. Creehan lost the defense in training camp and never got it back. As a result it infected the whole team.

 

 More than one player has commented how it has been like night and day compared to last year.

 

Gable will be starting. Not as fast as Walker but a better pass catcher and blocker.

 

Burris ' steady decline ? His only real bad year was 2011 bookended by great years. If you can demonstrate how he's so much less mobile I'd be interested in seeing it. (as opposed to just saying it)

 

IMO you're underrating Bulcke who will be starting. Overstating Williams only to knock him down ? Austin said he would probably be a rotational guy.

 

Who are the "people" that are picking HAM to challenge for first ? All I've seen is third or last, not that it matters.

 

Not a bad summation, a few straw-man arguments though.

 

I would like to counter a few of your arguments but I do think that you should understand that the purpose of this thread is to point out the flaws in the other teams and while keeping things fair, I'm not out to necessarily compliment the other teams in the league. I do appreciate your input however.

 

The comparison between Austin and Milanovich is fair to a point but there are pretty significant differences. Milanovich won the Cup last year and although there are a lot of changes on the Argos, the offence is mostly in tact and being the defending champs gives him the benefit of the doubt. Austin won the Cup in '07 which is essentially ages ago. It was a different time and a different team. He will have his work cut out for him but as I said, I expect him to be a good coach for the Ti-Cats. He just may not be the saviour he is expected to be by some. Another important different is that Milanovich had and has Chris Jones as his experienced DC. Steinauer may well be a great DC someday but as of now, there really is no contest between them.

 

If Gable is in fact the starter, I apologize for the misinformation. I fully admit I know very little about him so I can't write him off one way or the other. I mean, any CFL rookie is going to be a question mark but like Simpson and Kory Sheets were last year, he could easily surprise us. Import RB is probably the easiest position to play in the CFL to be completely honest and there's no reason for me to believe he can't be good. We just don't know.

 

I fully admit that most of my arguments and predictions are based on my own observations as well as some stats and some observations of others from other fan forums. I can't say for certain that Burris has lost a step but let's be honest with each other, a 38 year old QB is not going to be as mobile as his 30 or 35 year old self. History has shown that the mobile QBs have a shelf life shorter than the pocket QBs for obvious reasons. I can't take anything away from what Burris accomplished last year and if he repeats it this year good for him. I just think that not only will his time come sooner or later, but he also lost his top weapon from last year, a very good blocking and receiving tailback and a HC that clearly was on the same page as he was. Burris has been a very good QB in the league for a long time, but he's no Calvillo. Lasting as long as Calvillo has and staying as successful is most certainly not the norm.

 

Just because Bulcke is starting doesn't mean he is any good. I realize that he was a somewhat highly touted prospect coming out of Stanford but as of this very moment, he hasn't done jack in the league. Maybe there wasn't a spot for him in the Calgary D-line and that's why he couldn't crack the lineup regularly and was then allowed to walk but I apologize if he doesn't impress me much. As far as Williams goes, I may have even been kind to him in my writeup. As of this point in his career, he's been given ample opportunity to play and has frankly been garbage. Some of that blame goes to the Saskatchewan coaching staff for playing him out of position but he has given absolutely no indication that he can be a good player in the CFL at any point in his career up until now.

2007 is ages ago? No, it's not. Please tell me how the game has changed in 6 years as far as offensive & defensive systems go? What new innovations have taken place in that time that makes the CFL different now? We ran zone read in 2007 & we run it now. As far as I know defenses are similar if not the same. Not arguing as you have spent a lot of time on your team reviews here & your takes are pretty good. I just take exception to your comment. 

You can't win without a decent QB, as much as it pains me to say this, I feel like dumping Buck and going back to Glenn for a year while Goltz and Hall develop might've been a better idea.

You can't win without a decent QB, as much as it pains me to say this, I feel like dumping Buck and going back to Glenn for a year while Goltz and Hall develop might've been a better idea.

Having a great qb to help you win will never change. 

The comparison I drew between Austin and Milanovich was two rookie HC's who won Cups with, as you described, "favourable" conditions.

You can't win without a decent QB, as much as it pains me to say this, I feel like dumping Buck and going back to Glenn for a year while Goltz and Hall develop might've been a better idea.

 

that ship hasn't just left port... its mast is over the horizon.

Having a former QB as an OC or HC provides the experience of having been "eyes on" under fire. They have seen what a QB has seen. Others see what the video shows them. Easy to watch video and say you should have seen the open receiver when you have no clue what the QB actually saw from his vantage point under pressure.

The Hamilton analysis is all fine except I might suggest you compare coaching staffs and see how they stack up, both in terms of CFL coaching and playing experience.

Having a former QB as an OC or HC provides the experience of having been "eyes on" under fire. They have seen what a QB has seen. Others see what the video shows them. Easy to watch video and say you should have seen the open receiver when you have no clue what the QB actually saw from his vantage point under pressure.

 

Good point, Buck Pierce has said as much about Crowton before.

 

 

Crowton brings a wealth of experience and his familiarity with the quarterback position is an obvious bonus.

 

“He’s worked closely with quarterbacks and this is the first time for me that I’ve had a coach who was a quarterback,” said Pierce. “He understands what you can and what’s realistic to ask a guy to do and what’s out of the realm for a guy to do. He speaks our language and knows what it takes for us to be successful.

Good point, Buck Pierce has said as much about Crowton before.

 

I see what you did there.