I dont know why his name is never mentioned as someone to bring in and fix this mess. Paul Jones would be an excellent person to get here and run the show.

 

 

 

Say what you like about Miller but he is exactly the kind of bully they need in that role to stand up to the penny pinching civil servants on the board, hopefully, he can get them removed so we don't continue to be handcuffed by those clownshoes.

What?! There are 14 people on the BoD including 1 Provincial rep and one City rep.

Why in the world would we need a BOD comprised of 14 members to run a football operation? Seems excessive to me.

Riders have 11 on their BoD.

Sounds like a handful of ones that actually know what they're doing are being over-ruled by a mob of bean-counters. If that's what's going on here it's all beginning to make sense.

 

 

At one point the BoD was there for oversight and their apparent business experience. Then some of them decided they needed to be more hands on. They really should be like a company BoD more governance then any real interference. Like all things some perhaps have their own personal agenda. The opposite of it is being at the whim of a singular private owner I guess. That too has it's risks.

Absolutely. Imagine being owned by Al Davis.

 

Forget Davis, how about being owned by the Glieberman's or F Troop? 

{shudder}

 

I was thinking of this guy, Ken Moll. If you have the time, give a listen. Too bad Walters fired him as he'd be a real asset right now. .

It sure sounds like he knows what he's talking about. Why would Walters fire him?

 

 

Could have come down to money.  With his team scouting approach Walters may have offered Mol a huge cut in pay compared to what he was paid under Mack when it was basically a one-man show.

The BoD has about as much influence on the on-field product as you or I, yet every month or two there are people complaining about them.  They hire the CEO.  They set overall governance policy for the organization.  They review financials and set goals.  That's about it.  They do not have ANYTHING to do with the football operations of the team. Nothing, nada, zilch.  Now having said that, we'll still have people trying to blame them for the team's record, but every now and then I like to try and point out that blaming them for the win/loss is like blaming the board of Ford/GM/Chrysler when your car breaks down.

The BoD has about as much influence on the on-field product as you or I, yet every month or two there are people complaining about them.  They hire the CEO.  They set overall governance policy for the organization.  They review financials and set goals.  That's about it.  They do not have ANYTHING to do with the football operations of the team. Nothing, nada, zilch.  Now having said that, we'll still have people trying to blame them for the team's record, but every now and then I like to try and point out that blaming them for the win/loss is like blaming the board of Ford/GM/Chrysler when your car breaks down.

 

Right -- see the bolded.

I questioned the decision they made when it happened. And now, considering our record, I blame them for it. 

The BoD has about as much influence on the on-field product as you or I, yet every month or two there are people complaining about them.  They hire the CEO.  They set overall governance policy for the organization.  They review financials and set goals.  That's about it.  They do not have ANYTHING to do with the football operations of the team. Nothing, nada, zilch.  Now having said that, we'll still have people trying to blame them for the team's record, but every now and then I like to try and point out that blaming them for the win/loss is like blaming the board of Ford/GM/Chrysler when your car breaks down.

 

Ideally that's what they would do.  How was Joe Mack hired?  There's a long history of the BOD doing a lot more than hiring the CEO and staying out of the way.

 

The BoD has about as much influence on the on-field product as you or I, yet every month or two there are people complaining about them.  They hire the CEO.  They set overall governance policy for the organization.  They review financials and set goals.  That's about it.  They do not have ANYTHING to do with the football operations of the team. Nothing, nada, zilch.  Now having said that, we'll still have people trying to blame them for the team's record, but every now and then I like to try and point out that blaming them for the win/loss is like blaming the board of Ford/GM/Chrysler when your car breaks down.

 

Ideally that's what they would do.  How was Joe Mack hired?  There's a long history of the BOD doing a lot more than hiring the CEO and staying out of the way.

 

I guess people don't remember Asper on the sidelines making an ass out of himself years ago

 

The BoD has about as much influence on the on-field product as you or I, yet every month or two there are people complaining about them.  They hire the CEO.  They set overall governance policy for the organization.  They review financials and set goals.  That's about it.  They do not have ANYTHING to do with the football operations of the team. Nothing, nada, zilch.  Now having said that, we'll still have people trying to blame them for the team's record, but every now and then I like to try and point out that blaming them for the win/loss is like blaming the board of Ford/GM/Chrysler when your car breaks down.

 

Right -- see the bolded.

I questioned the decision they made when it happened. And now, considering our record, I blame them for it. 

 

I seem to recall that the vast majority of people were pleased with Miller's hire because he had real football knowledge, as opposed to Garth Buchko.  The thinking seemed to be that he'd be better at picking a GM.  Really can't fault the board for that logic.  That Miller hired Walters was a bit of a puzzler to me, but again that has nothing to do with the BoD.

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

No not at all.  The BoD does what it does, Miller does what he does.  They didn't "indirectly" hire anyone.  I lend you my car.  You run someone over.  Did I indirectly run them over?

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

Yes. And if they want to fire Miller they can do it.

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

No not at all.  The BoD does what it does, Miller does what he does.  They didn't "indirectly" hire anyone.  I lend you my car.  You run someone over.  Did I indirectlyn them over?

 

So, Miller answers to absolutely no one? Who fired Butchko? Who hired Miller?

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

Yes. And if they want to fire Miller they can do it.

 

you can quote it three times, but that won't magically make you right.

You hire someone to do a job. That person then does a poor job of hiring someone....who then does a poor job of hiring a HC who is responsible and then who do you fire? The Bomber answer is you fire no one. There is some real logic now. Get ready to live it Bomber fans.

 

 

Does logic dictate that if the BoD hired Miller and Miller hires Walters that you describe as a puzzler is the BoD then indirectly responsible for Walters being hired?

No not at all.  The BoD does what it does, Miller does what he does.  They didn't "indirectly" hire anyone.  I lend you my car.  You run someone over.  Did I indirectlyn them over?

 

So, Miller answers to absolutely no one? Who fired Butchko? Who hired Miller?

 

Of course Miller answers to the BoD. That he answers to the BoD does not make the BoD directly or indirectly responsible for the decisions he makes.  You're asking one question and trying to use the answer to frame an entirely different question.  

But what you're saying makes no sense. The Bombers CEO & BOD have final  say. They hired, approved, whatever you want to say... Wade Miller & they can remove him. 

But what you're saying makes no sense. The Bombers CEO & BOD have final  say. They hired, approved, whatever you want to say... Wade Miller & they can remove him. 

If you're suggesting that they would fire Miller because he didn't nail it on his first try at hiring a GM, you might be setting your goals just a bit too high.  Keep in mind that the CEO does other things besides hire a GM, so it's possible that maybe he's meeting expectations on a lot of other things.  I know that on a board like this it's real easy to yell "fire him" every time someone decides that there's a problem, but the people who are having to operate in the real world actually do things in a bit more rational fashion.  Sorry to disappoint.

The Bombers BOD has traditionally been involved in the hiring process for both GM's and head coaches.  Not the entire board, but ad hoc committees have been directly involved with the interviewing, short listing and final decisions.

The Bombers BOD has traditionally been involved in the hiring process for both GM's and head coaches.  Not the entire board, but ad hoc committees have been directly involved with the interviewing, short listing and final decisions.

 

Once doesn't make it traditionally. They did that after Bauer left as an over-reaction to giving Bauer too much power. 

The Bombers BOD has traditionally been involved in the hiring process for both GM's and head coaches.  Not the entire board, but ad hoc committees have been directly involved with the interviewing, short listing and final decisions.

The only way that ad-hoc committees of the BoD get involved with this stuff is if the CEO allows it, which he shouldn't.  And whenever I here the word "traditionally" alarm bells go off.  How do you know of this tradition?  Who started it?  Does it still go on, or is it one of those, "we did it once/a long time ago so that must mean we always do it that way" sorts of things.

 

But what you're saying makes no sense. The Bombers CEO & BOD have final  say. They hired, approved, whatever you want to say... Wade Miller & they can remove him. 

If you're suggesting that they would fire Miller because he didn't nail it on his first try at hiring a GM, you might be setting your goals just a bit too high.  Keep in mind that the CEO does other things besides hire a GM, so it's possible that maybe he's meeting expectations on a lot of other things.  I know that on a board like this it's real easy to yell "fire him" every time someone decides that there's a problem, but the people who are having to operate in the real world actually do things in a bit more rational fashion.  Sorry to disappoint.

 

Okay then,  then who hires & fires Miller? Some mystic wizard from Harry Potter? And if you still are talking in riddles deliberately without making sense then no wonder the Bombers are one ****** up team.

So now we are going to deal Miller getting too much power ?

 

 

But what you're saying makes no sense. The Bombers CEO & BOD have final  say. They hired, approved, whatever you want to say... Wade Miller & they can remove him. 

If you're suggesting that they would fire Miller because he didn't nail it on his first try at hiring a GM, you might be setting your goals just a bit too high.  Keep in mind that the CEO does other things besides hire a GM, so it's possible that maybe he's meeting expectations on a lot of other things.  I know that on a board like this it's real easy to yell "fire him" every time someone decides that there's a problem, but the people who are having to operate in the real world actually do things in a bit more rational fashion.  Sorry to disappoint.

 

Okay then,  then who hires & fires Miller? Sme mystic wizard from Harry Potter?

 

It would appear that either you have a hard time following a discussion, or you're being deliberately obtuse.  I'm pointing out the abserdity of your argument and you're responding with a rather sad attempt at sarcasm with the Harry Potter stuff.  I realize that complaining is really your forte, but I was hoping for some small amount of substance within the rants.  It's appearing to me that all you intend to do is yell "fire them, fire them all".  Not going to waste anymore time trying to explain things to someone who is doing his very best to actually avoid rationality.  

 

The Bombers BOD has traditionally been involved in the hiring process for both GM's and head coaches.  Not the entire board, but ad hoc committees have been directly involved with the interviewing, short listing and final decisions.

 

Once doesn't make it traditionally. They did that after Bauer left as an over-reaction to giving Bauer too much power. 

 

They also did it because of the absence of a CEO.  That's one of those rare times when a board does get involved in hiring below the CEO because someone's gotta do it/

No, you're the one being obtuse. Who fired Butchko? Who hired Miller?