Jump to content

Fire O'Shea


holoman

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I desperately wish for is an experienced GM that could sit O'Shea down and mentor him.  Explain how loyalty is great, but winning is greater.  I don't think that Walters has the chops to do that and as a result the team suffers because of O'Shea's misplaced loyalty to coaches and players that just aren't good enough.  He may just have to learn the hard way that keeping coaches and players that aren't that good, but who really love you just means that you'll have lots of guys willing to carry stuff out to your car as you clean out your office.

Is he THAT loyal though? He's fired people that folks said he'd never fire and that he personally likes, he's cut players not performing (just slower than some people like). I don't think O'Shea is loyal to a fault, I think he's just patient.... which is likely why so many here have a problem with him. Lotta knee jerk reactions types on message boards. 

 

Etch, MB and Kuale say hi

 

and he tossed Etch and Kuale!

 

Yes he did, but after the damage had been done and the season was over.  He stuck by both even though it was clear that neither was good enough.  In the case of Etch, it was pretty clear that he agonized over the decision, which is completely baffling to me because Etch was so incredibly bad.   And you don't wait an entire season to see if an under performing MLB will suddenly "get it" especially when he was doing the same thing with another team before we signed him.  Instead, you march down to your GM and get him to find you someone else chop bloody chop.  So sorry, waiting for season's end to fix stuff doesn't count in my books.

 

You're still confusing loyalty with patience. 

 

No sorry, I'm not.  Patience is waiting to see if you can correct a problem, but acting when it becomes apparent that you can't  Loyalty (the problematic kind) is hanging onto someone long after they've demonstrated that they are just not good enough under some delusion that a bolt from the blue will strike and they'll suddenly morph into the player/coach you always knew they would be.

 

I will grant that it is possible that what we are seeing is not misplaced loyalty, but sheer stubbornness, or pride.  Label it what you will, but the results seem to be the same.

 

No you really are, trying to change the definition isn't a good argument, just trying to salvage a losing position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I desperately wish for is an experienced GM that could sit O'Shea down and mentor him.  Explain how loyalty is great, but winning is greater.  I don't think that Walters has the chops to do that and as a result the team suffers because of O'Shea's misplaced loyalty to coaches and players that just aren't good enough.  He may just have to learn the hard way that keeping coaches and players that aren't that good, but who really love you just means that you'll have lots of guys willing to carry stuff out to your car as you clean out your office.

Is he THAT loyal though? He's fired people that folks said he'd never fire and that he personally likes, he's cut players not performing (just slower than some people like). I don't think O'Shea is loyal to a fault, I think he's just patient.... which is likely why so many here have a problem with him. Lotta knee jerk reactions types on message boards. 

 

Etch, MB and Kuale say hi

 

and he tossed Etch and Kuale!

 

Yes he did, but after the damage had been done and the season was over.  He stuck by both even though it was clear that neither was good enough.  In the case of Etch, it was pretty clear that he agonized over the decision, which is completely baffling to me because Etch was so incredibly bad.   And you don't wait an entire season to see if an under performing MLB will suddenly "get it" especially when he was doing the same thing with another team before we signed him.  Instead, you march down to your GM and get him to find you someone else chop bloody chop.  So sorry, waiting for season's end to fix stuff doesn't count in my books.

 

You're still confusing loyalty with patience. 

 

No sorry, I'm not.  Patience is waiting to see if you can correct a problem, but acting when it becomes apparent that you can't  Loyalty (the problematic kind) is hanging onto someone long after they've demonstrated that they are just not good enough under some delusion that a bolt from the blue will strike and they'll suddenly morph into the player/coach you always knew they would be.

 

I will grant that it is possible that what we are seeing is not misplaced loyalty, but sheer stubbornness, or pride.  Label it what you will, but the results seem to be the same.

 

No you really are, trying to change the definition isn't a good argument, just trying to salvage a losing position. 

 

Oh yea, I forgot about your "debate style".  Congratz, you win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I dont' like this hindsight "Our back-up QBs were the shits all along!" stuff, either, because before this season virtually everyone on this board was RAVING about our QB depth and how we could trade one of them for a top pick or roster player or blah blah blah whatever. After this season, there's a lot of revisionist history going on.

Marve was one thing...a prospect at least with upside.   8 yr. pro Brohm was quite another.  Following on the heels of Boltus, it is fair to ask why we cannot acquire/DEVELOP QBs for the last million years.....

 

But, agian, Brohm looked really good in spot duty last year and this past off-season people raved about him AND Marve. So it's only this year that the anti-Brohm stuff has begun. 

 

"looked really good"......bit of exaggeration here

 

Brohm looked sort of passable in one start.   He followed that up by doing nothing in this years X season, and doing totally nothing this regular season......and seem to look worse with more snaps, instead of better - not what one would expect from an experienced guy....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Oh yea, I forgot about your "debate style".  Congratz, you win.

 

 

relentless logic and not allowing people to get out of erroneous claims? Yeah it does tend to win debates. 

 

I call debating with you more of an "arguing with the wife" style, but you can call it whatever you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Oh yea, I forgot about your "debate style".  Congratz, you win.

 

 

relentless logic and not allowing people to get out of erroneous claims? Yeah it does tend to win debates. 

 

Two terms that are sometimes overused and misinterpreted to make a point. We are all guilty of it, some more than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walters has not been spectacular but has made some good moves: Westerman, Wild, Darvin Adams, Nichols etc but not enough to qualify for GM of the year. Hr merits another year in the GM office.

Some good moves there, I agree, but his work on the offensive side of the ball is kinda suspect. He's not Barker or Murphy. O'Shea hasn't had much to work with on the offensive side of the ball and our big FA signing in Moore hasn't worked out very well either. Picard has been a total bust. Walker a disappointment. 

 

I think if we have an opportunity to upgrade our GM we should take it. Send Kyle to Guelph with our best wishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All depends on what the '3 year plan' was though  doesn't it?

The three year plan was, according to Walters, to "improve the organization". Why set lofty goals when we do mediocre so well?  ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol. Blaming Hurl when the O did nothing yet again for 3.5 quarters is maddening. The OC is the problem. Hurl is the least of our concerns really. The D stepped up at half. Ottawa had Damn near 22 minutes on O in the first half... not just cuz our D couldn't stop them but also because our O did **** all... going after Hurl is just ridiculous in a game where the final score could have been a lot worse. Yup it'd Hurl. 2 100 yard receivers... 5 turnovers. ... Nichols sucking...but Hurl is the problem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol. Blaming Hurl when the O did nothing yet again for 3.5 quarters is maddening. The OC is the problem. Hurl is the least of our concerns really. The D stepped up at half. Ottawa had Damn near 22 minutes on O in the first half... not just cuz our D couldn't stop them but also because our O did **** all... going after Hurl is just ridiculous in a game where the final score could have been a lot worse. Yup it'd Hurl. 2 100 yard receivers... 5 turnovers. ... Nichols sucking...but Hurl is the problem

 

Hurl is one of the problem... there are many, no one is denying that.

 

At least we can fire MB and start again.  But sitting Wild while playing Hurl and this fixation to play 8 or more Canadians is on Osh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...