Start getting excited, Bombers fans

Team's brass knows about Canadian ball, for a change...

By: Gary Lawless

The first thing Kyle Walters did as new GM of the Winnipeg Blue Bombers was look at the football operations budget and cut a big chunk out of the department's top salary and then plow it right back into scouting and coaching.

Coupled with a renewed commitment from the front office to spend more on football, the dividends have already been large. With the hiring of Buck Pierce as a running backs coach Friday, Bombers coach Mike O'Shea announced he'll have a coaching staff of 11 this season, which is two more than last year and the largest in club history according to the communications department.

The Bombers also have more scouts than last season and all in all the football operations department looks like a real, live pro-football outfit. Something that couldn't be said the last few years in Winnipeg. I made the statement a number of times during the Joe Mack era that the Bombers were beat long before the game ever got to the field. That can no longer be said.

Walters was handed the budget by CEO Wade Miller last summer during his time as acting GM and asked how he would change it. Walters took $100,000 out of the GMs salary and moved money around on the spreadsheet. And then he asked for even more money to spend on football. He got it.

Miller promised Walters he'd commit to putting the Bombers on a level playing field with the rest of the CFL's football operations departments and he's lived up to it. The Bombers will allocate more than $10 million for all things football this season. More than last year and catching up with most teams in the CFL.

One can argue more coaches and more scouts mean little if they don't add up to wins and that's a fair statement. As important as how much money one has to spend is how well that money gets spent.

This is where the Bombers have made their biggest improvements under Miller and Walters.

When the 2013 season began, the Bombers had a CEO with no football experience, a GM who proved to have little to no understanding of how to build a CFL roster, a head coach with no offensive experience in the CFL and an offensive co-ordinator who admitted he was still learning the CFL game. I couldn't make that up if I tried.

Today, they have a former player in Miller as CEO, a young GM in Walters but one with a lifetime of CIS and CFL roots, Hall of Fame player Mike O'Shea at head coach and two former quarterbacks Pierce and Danny McManus in the coaching and scouting ranks as well as seasoned and experienced CFL men Marcel Bellefeuille and Gary Etcheverry at the offensive and defensive co-ordinator positions.

Off the field, the Bombers are light years ahead of where they were at this time last season and if it doesn't equate to wins right away, it will in time. The Bombers were the worst-run organization in the CFL for a number of years but that can no longer be said.

The Mack era distinguished itself in its stubborn refusal to admit ignorance of the Canadian game. Beyond all of that era's many failings, this is why the team progressively got worse.

No one in Canada understands the nuances of the Canadian game better than Walters and O'Shea. They played three-down football all their lives. Then they moved into coaching it and in Walters' case to management.

I once asked Joe Mack what he thought of Brad Sinopoli as a player, who had been named winner of the Hec Creighton Trophy as Canada's best collegiate player the day before. He looked at me funny and then admitted he didn't know who I was talking about. That's akin to an NFL GM not knowing the Heisman winner. This wasn't a moment of weakness. Mack was a scout and by all accounts a good one. But he ignored the Canadian component of the CFL, which is foolish and unforgiveable.

Last week, I asked Walters about the upcoming CFL draft. He gave me a detailed description of the top five players and then told me he'd be drafting one of three players depending on their availability when he selects second overall. Gave me their names, strengths and weaknesses.

Walters also told me the draft was weak and fell off dramatically after the first five picks which is why he won't capitulate to Ottawa GM Marcel Desjardins' demand for the No. 2 pick for quarterback Kevin Glenn.

Does Walters want Glenn? Sure but he wants to ensure the future of the franchise and not just improve the club for a couple of seasons.

Bombers fans should be enthused but more about the long term health of their team than just this coming summer. The Bombers are back in good CFL hands from Miller to Walters to O'Shea. That's the best news of all.

He picked an angle and then talked about it in a relatively well-written article.  If you take it for face value, you see a sportswriter talking about the state of the franchise and how it would appear based on the off-season moves we've made.  Not too inflammatory imo.  Any further that's being read into the article is a choice you're consciously making.

 

He's presenting a story and we can either like it or lump it. 

When I saw the words "great article" and "Gary Lawless" on the title of this thread I knew there'd be fireworks for sure.

I don't hate Lawless but I don't go out of my way to read him either. As was noted before, he will change his opinions pretty quickly if the opportunity presents itself. It's nice to read a positive article, but I don't expect it to last too long.

I change the channel when he is on t.v., change the station when he comes on the radio and never read an article unless it is mentioned on here.  Even then I just skim over it.

 

So he does not bother me at all..... 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

 

You see once again you miss the entire point. I love to argue, the problem is that you started bitching and moaning about the fact that I didn't let you get away with your bullshit so in an effort to ease up I said I'd tone it down as long as you did, but you didn't so now I am wondering why. The problem with comparing your criticism of Mack is that you invent things, when I criticize Lawless it's all the truth and much more about an opinion than pretending it's all fact like you do in regards to Mack. Don't worry, you can't get me worked up because I don't get worked up about this stuff like you do. Have you ever seen me complain about people arguing with me? That's the entire goal here. 

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

 

You see once again you miss the entire point. I love to argue, the problem is that you started bitching and moaning about the fact that I didn't let you get away with your bullshit so in an effort to ease up I said I'd tone it down as long as you did, but you didn't so now I am wondering why. The problem with comparing your criticism of Mack is that you invent things, when I criticize Lawless it's all the truth and much more about an opinion than pretending it's all fact like you do in regards to Mack. Don't worry, you can't get me worked up because I don't get worked up about this stuff like you do. Have you ever seen me complain about people arguing with me? That's the entire goal here. 

 

I think you're getting worked up

 

 

See, this is exactly what I was talking about. The same people criticize & insult Lawless even when he has a positive article yet object to any ongoing criticism of Joe Mack. The same old **** gets stirred round & round by the same people. Yet, here we have the same people criticizing & name calling Lawless also have a major hard on for Joe Mack. Dare not criticize Joe because the hair on the back of their necks go up in anger. Yet, they make fun of Lawless any chance they get. Totally hypocritical if you ask me. Well too, too bad. It's a football website & as long as the comments are within the rules & the subject of Joe Mack comes up & you don't like it's just too bad. Any subject is fair game. Stop talking about Lawless in a negative manner with insults if you don't like criticism of Mack in any way, shape or form. You can't have it both ways so don't expect it. 

I'm not defending Lawless & the content he writes. Not saying it's good or bad. just expressing an opinion.  

Well when you want to stop inventing make believe arguments about Joe Mack I'll stop arguing with you. It's totally different because I'm calling Lawless a terrible writer, which he is. Nothing more nothing less. Just stating the simple fact that since Tait moved to the Jets and Turner stopped doing anything the Free Press coverage has been laughably bad and Lawless is part of that. 

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

You can't defend Mack.. The record under him is laughable. yes.. We made it to the grey cup which was a really nice surprise, but its like Buck and Lapo Willed us into that game.  The lack of talent at the O-line, Qb and and OC coaching positions never got better...   Mack took a bad team over from Kelly, and didn't really improve it in the 4 years he had managing the Team.  Did he find some good players? Sure.. But he didnt address the positions that needed to be addressed.  Lapo was a good coach and was good for the team, but he had **** to deal with.. Burke's team looked even worse with similar players.. 

 

but i digress. 

 

 

 

See, this is exactly what I was talking about. The same people criticize & insult Lawless even when he has a positive article yet object to any ongoing criticism of Joe Mack. The same old **** gets stirred round & round by the same people. Yet, here we have the same people criticizing & name calling Lawless also have a major hard on for Joe Mack. Dare not criticize Joe because the hair on the back of their necks go up in anger. Yet, they make fun of Lawless any chance they get. Totally hypocritical if you ask me. Well too, too bad. It's a football website & as long as the comments are within the rules & the subject of Joe Mack comes up & you don't like it's just too bad. Any subject is fair game. Stop talking about Lawless in a negative manner with insults if you don't like criticism of Mack in any way, shape or form. You can't have it both ways so don't expect it. 

I'm not defending Lawless & the content he writes. Not saying it's good or bad. just expressing an opinion.  

Well when you want to stop inventing make believe arguments about Joe Mack I'll stop arguing with you. It's totally different because I'm calling Lawless a terrible writer, which he is. Nothing more nothing less. Just stating the simple fact that since Tait moved to the Jets and Turner stopped doing anything the Free Press coverage has been laughably bad and Lawless is part of that. 

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

You can't defend Mack.. The record under him is laughable. yes.. We made it to the grey cup which was a really nice surprise, but its like Buck and Lapo Willed us into that game.  The lack of talent at the O-line, Qb and and OC coaching positions never got better...   Mack took a bad team over from Kelly, and didn't really improve it in the 4 years he had managing the Team.  Did he find some good players? Sure.. But he didnt address the positions that needed to be addressed.  Lapo was a good coach and was good for the team, but he had **** to deal with.. Burke's team looked even worse with similar players.. 

 

but i digress. 

 

That's the CFL for you though.  Squeak into the playoffs and get hot.

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

 

You see once again you miss the entire point. I love to argue, the problem is that you started bitching and moaning about the fact that I didn't let you get away with your bullshit so in an effort to ease up I said I'd tone it down as long as you did, but you didn't so now I am wondering why. The problem with comparing your criticism of Mack is that you invent things, when I criticize Lawless it's all the truth and much more about an opinion than pretending it's all fact like you do in regards to Mack. Don't worry, you can't get me worked up because I don't get worked up about this stuff like you do. Have you ever seen me complain about people arguing with me? That's the entire goal here. 

 

Settled Down shelly

 

 

 

 

See, this is exactly what I was talking about. The same people criticize & insult Lawless even when he has a positive article yet object to any ongoing criticism of Joe Mack. The same old **** gets stirred round & round by the same people. Yet, here we have the same people criticizing & name calling Lawless also have a major hard on for Joe Mack. Dare not criticize Joe because the hair on the back of their necks go up in anger. Yet, they make fun of Lawless any chance they get. Totally hypocritical if you ask me. Well too, too bad. It's a football website & as long as the comments are within the rules & the subject of Joe Mack comes up & you don't like it's just too bad. Any subject is fair game. Stop talking about Lawless in a negative manner with insults if you don't like criticism of Mack in any way, shape or form. You can't have it both ways so don't expect it. 

I'm not defending Lawless & the content he writes. Not saying it's good or bad. just expressing an opinion.  

Well when you want to stop inventing make believe arguments about Joe Mack I'll stop arguing with you. It's totally different because I'm calling Lawless a terrible writer, which he is. Nothing more nothing less. Just stating the simple fact that since Tait moved to the Jets and Turner stopped doing anything the Free Press coverage has been laughably bad and Lawless is part of that. 

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

You can't defend Mack.. The record under him is laughable. yes.. We made it to the grey cup which was a really nice surprise, but its like Buck and Lapo Willed us into that game.  The lack of talent at the O-line, Qb and and OC coaching positions never got better...   Mack took a bad team over from Kelly, and didn't really improve it in the 4 years he had managing the Team.  Did he find some good players? Sure.. But he didnt address the positions that needed to be addressed.  Lapo was a good coach and was good for the team, but he had **** to deal with.. Burke's team looked even worse with similar players.. 

 

but i digress. 

 

That's the CFL for you though.  Squeak into the playoffs and get hot.

 

Yup.. part of why the league is fun... But the grey cup appearance doesn't really speak to this being becuase of the work Mack did.. sure. he is repsonsible for getting the team there.. But he is also responsible for how shitty the team was before and after that  

 

You can't defend Mack.. The record under him is laughable. yes.. We made it to the grey cup which was a really nice surprise, but its like Buck and Lapo Willed us into that game.  The lack of talent at the O-line, Qb and and OC coaching positions never got better...   Mack took a bad team over from Kelly, and didn't really improve it in the 4 years he had managing the Team.  Did he find some good players? Sure.. But he didnt address the positions that needed to be addressed.  Lapo was a good coach and was good for the team, but he had **** to deal with.. Burke's team looked even worse with similar players.. 

 

 

but i digress. 

 

You can defend against erroneous attacks. If iso kept his attacks to simple stuff like the record then there's no issue but he goes into things that are easily argued. 

 

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

 

You see once again you miss the entire point. I love to argue, the problem is that you started bitching and moaning about the fact that I didn't let you get away with your bullshit so in an effort to ease up I said I'd tone it down as long as you did, but you didn't so now I am wondering why. The problem with comparing your criticism of Mack is that you invent things, when I criticize Lawless it's all the truth and much more about an opinion than pretending it's all fact like you do in regards to Mack. Don't worry, you can't get me worked up because I don't get worked up about this stuff like you do. Have you ever seen me complain about people arguing with me? That's the entire goal here. 

 

Settled Down shelly

 

Did you just respond to yourself?  

Lawless does a fine job. Look how worked up you all get. Mission accomplished.

You're the man wolowitz

 

Lawless does a fine job. Look how worked up you all get. Mission accomplished.

Every time someone criticizes a writer on here we have to read a million variations of this comment. I don't buy it.  Other than the odd exception (Paul Friesen?) I think these guys are actually attempting to write thought-provoking articles that people read because they inform and are interesting. It's just that they (sports media) seem to get caught up in a lot of negative, cynical groupthink a lot of the time. Probably because a lot of these guys don't appear to actually like the sports that they are covering.

 

And I'm saying this all in a general context, as I don't really think Lawless really does that.  I don't mind him. I do strongly disagree with a lot of his opinions. But that's not uncommon in sports I'm sure. I can't expect everyone to be as smrt as me.

Lawless does a fine job. Look how worked up you all get. Mission accomplished.

If we were discussing his actual article maybe but it's not that, we're discussion whether he's a poor writer or a terrible writer, entirely different. 

 

Until then please again spare me the imagined optimism!

Winnipeg Blue Bombers, Superbowl LIII champions....ahhhh....my imagination is the only thing that has kept me sane since 1990....

 

We've all been living on a mixture of hope and anger. Yes, this batch of quarterbacks doesn't have a lot of name-brand recognition, but last year, we KNEW what were were going to have to live with in quarterbacks, and it was ug-a-lee. It was one of the few seasons that I dreaded looking forward to watching.

 

 

 

No way,man. I'll argue with you till the cows come home about Mack. You get bothered.... and you do get bothered.... even though you deny it...  whenever someone dares to criticize Mack. Yet you criticize Lawless any chance you get which I find hypocritical. So, hey everyone.... Looks like 17 &  I are juuuust getting started.

 

 

You see once again you miss the entire point. I love to argue, the problem is that you started bitching and moaning about the fact that I didn't let you get away with your bullshit so in an effort to ease up I said I'd tone it down as long as you did, but you didn't so now I am wondering why. The problem with comparing your criticism of Mack is that you invent things, when I criticize Lawless it's all the truth and much more about an opinion than pretending it's all fact like you do in regards to Mack. Don't worry, you can't get me worked up because I don't get worked up about this stuff like you do. Have you ever seen me complain about people arguing with me? That's the entire goal here. 

 

Settled Down shelly

 

Did you just respond to yourself?  

 

Just messin' with his head.

apparently my mirrored avatar was too confusing for some people

apparently my mirrored avatar was too confusing for some people

LOL you bugger.  That's why I thought that was 17.