Three keys to Blue Bombers' success

During a recent four-minute radio bit, I was asked to come up with three of the most imperative, actionable items the local professional football squad needs to deliver on for a successful 2016.

While it can be difficult to sort through the chaff and identify these key kernels — as an obscene number of variables can impact a football season — it is an interesting and thought-provoking exercise.

 

It’s easiest to begin with what is sure to be a consensus factor for success for most any CFL team: the task of keeping your starting pivot clean and upright for 18 games. With all due respect to Matt Nichols — who does give the Winnipeg Blue Bombers an opportunity to win should a piece of starter Drew Willy break again — the franchise quarterback is still the quickest road to competence and to redeeming a ticket to the playoffs.

While the play of the offensive line is critical in keeping any pivot functional, the line should never carry this burden alone. If you give most defences enough of the same looks as to how and where your quarterback will operate in predictable scenarios, regardless of whom you have on your line, they will find a way to get to him.

The challenge will be as much about forcing defences to respect the run, having the entire offence understand the protection schemes, moving the pocket and changing the launch points, and having a crew of receivers that can recognize and adjust to the coverages and imbalances that occur. It all starts with the five men up front but it will take the entire unit to help keep Willy healthy.

The second core factor is the lag time it usually takes a new offence, with new players, to get up to speed. The Bombers simply don’t have the luxury of growing pains this year.

Each season, you are certain to hear defensive players play at a higher level faster than their counterparts on offence due to the different nature of these phases of football. Smart defensive co-ordinators working with a number of new players (Winnipeg’s defensive line will have three new starters) keep things simple at the beginning of the year and gradually add complexities and wrinkles. If your starting 12 on defence play fast and react instinctually, they are already three-quarters of the way to tapping their potential as a unit.

Conversely, because things such as timing, recognition and rhythm are critical for an offence to be productive (and there is a new playbook to be learned as Paul LaPolice takes over plotting the Bombers’ attack) this will be a large obstacle to surmount. Add to the equation they will be competing against some of the best defences in the CFL last year, starting in week 1, and this learning curve needs to be short and sweet — or it could be over before it begins.

Finally, the third major variable deals with the many new, high-profile players that joined in the off-season the Bombers via free agency.

From a leadership standpoint, there is a fine line between a player joining a football team and wanting to step up and lead and contribute, and a disastrous Casey Printers-type scenario (circa 2007, when he reportedly alienated three-quarters of the Hamilton Tiger-Cats’ room by assuming a mantle of leadership that had not yet been granted to him).

Rarely do all new additions understand the size of the contract you wield does not automatically garner you authority and a platform on a new team. When existing leadership ranks are merged with new personalities that are also used to leading the way, it is up to the head coach to clearly define roles and ensure group dynamics are as harmonious as they can be in such a testosterone-laden environment.

Outside of navigating these three ominous factors, a return to prominence for the Blue Bombers should be a piece of cake.

 

Doug Brown, once a hard-hitting defensive lineman and frequently a hard-hitting columnist, appears weekly in the Free Press.

Twitter: @DougBrown97

He brings up valid concerns though, they are just obvious...very very obvious.  Is it being negative for the sake of being negative,  maybe, but there's nothing wrong with having concerns. It would be nice if he either dedicated half the article to positives, such as our Dline upgrade,  our new offensive players and no more MB, but maybe that's for his next article

19 hours ago, J5V said:

I know I'm a little slow but ... Huh? 

If I'm understanding Zontar - the unabashed TICAT fan - correctly, he is pointing out the manner in which, if the season starts off well, Doug Brown will frame the conversation as to how we just don't understand why the sky is in fact still falling.  Based on existing evidence, it sounds about right.

Not

2 hours ago, White Out said:

The cheerleaders on this forum cant possibly understand how others are skeptical of the worst run franchise in the CFL by a country mile. Imagine that.

But I can certainly understand why the sky always falling resonates with you.

I will also add, I really can't stand people who are over the top always positive also tho. So theres a fine line for sure. Our media guys need to be able to have more middle ground cuz right now they are and have been for some time in the opposite extremely negative area. 

Why not just tell us some good along with some bad. Concerns are valid for sure, but... at the same time, They have done some very good things also. 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

He brings up valid concerns though, they are just obvious...very very obvious.

And also the part where these same concerns would be true for over half the teams in the league, not just the Bombers.

1 hour ago, MOBomberFan said:

GO JETS GO!

Damn straight.

I'm probably in the minority in never feeling good about supporting the Jets tanking/losing to increase their chances at getting the number 1 draft pick.

I want them to win no matter where they are in the standings, no matter where the season is at. Look how Vancouver is getting blown out lately, Look at Toronto, Look at Edmonton. Historically look at how draft picks have helped teams move from have nots, to haves and the time frames, if any of these three teams secure Austin Matthews does in no way secure their 'have' status. Again, getting a player like Matthews would be great, but it's just a bonus that's it.  

I could really care less if we land Austen Matthews. If it happens, great, bonus but I'm not supporting the, 'this is what we need to put us over the top' type mentality.

I'm more looking at the bigger picture needs and what our Coaching Staff, GM and Owners are going to do about getting this team to a better place.

1 minute ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Damn straight.

I'm probably in the minority in never feeling good about supporting the Jets tanking/losing to increase their chances at getting the number 1 draft pick.

I want them to win no matter where they are in the standings, no matter where the season is at. Look how Vancouver is getting blown out lately, Look at Toronto, Look at Edmonton. Historically look at how draft picks have helped teams move from have nots, to haves and the time frames, if any of these three teams secure Austin Matthews does in no way secure their 'have' status. Again, getting a player like Matthews would be great, but it's just a bonus that's it.  

I could really care less if we land Austen Matthews. If it happens, great, bonus but I'm not supporting the, 'this is what we need to put us over the top' type mentality.

I'm more looking at the bigger picture needs and what our Coaching Staff, GM and Owners are going to do about getting this team to a better place.

My friend ripped my head off when I talked about the Jets tanking, she was down right scary angry saying she didnt buy season tickets to watch them lose no matter how out of the playoffs they were.  I get it,  but I try to be optimistic (with tanking)  

It's too hard to tank in the CFL when 80% of the league gets into the playoffs, you gotta be a whole new level of suck to suck that much (we haven't made the playoffs since 2011...ridiculous) However, because the CFL is such a small league, I feel a personal level of dislike for each and every team,  especially when you can get so familiar with them. Watching us beat the piss outta someone is still satisfying even if we arent in the playoffs

if u look at the last 6 to Stanley cup winners, they have all one thing in common, they all picked very high in the draft, chi and la come to mind

u need a top 1-3 pick otherwise u will be a middle of the pack team and get no where, u need that it factor , mc david will do that down teh rd for edm,

time will tell

2 hours ago, Goalie said:

I will also add, I really can't stand people who are over the top always positive also tho. So theres a fine line for sure. Our media guys need to be able to have more middle ground cuz right now they are and have been for some time in the opposite extremely negative area. 

Why not just tell us some good along with some bad. Concerns are valid for sure, but... at the same time, They have done some very good things also. 

 

 

well screw you too buddy!

3 hours ago, mbrg said:

If I'm understanding Zontar - the unabashed TICAT fan - correctly, he is pointing out the manner in which, if the season starts off well, Doug Brown will frame the conversation as to how we just don't understand why the sky is in fact still falling.  Based on existing evidence, it sounds about right.

Yup. Read it again today and got it. Must have been having one of those days yesterday. Sorry Zontar.  :-)

1 hour ago, wookie said:

if u look at the last 6 to Stanley cup winners, they have all one thing in common, they all picked very high in the draft, chi and la come to mind

u need a top 1-3 pick otherwise u will be a middle of the pack team and get no where, u need that it factor , mc david will do that down teh rd for edm,

time will tell

Jonathan Toews. Winnipeg boy! Woot! Best clutch player I have seen in the last 20 years. Ice water in his veins. Super smart. Steve Izerman style of leadership. His performance in the 2007 World Juniors was superb! What a beauty! Chicago is so lucky to have him.

 

1 hour ago, wookie said:

if u look at the last 6 to Stanley cup winners, they have all one thing in common, they all picked very high in the draft, chi and la come to mind

u need a top 1-3 pick otherwise u will be a middle of the pack team and get no where, u need that it factor , mc david will do that down teh rd for edm,

time will tell

Time has come and gone for Edmonton, no?

6 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I have no problem with media being "honest" even if its negative.  Blake Wheeler once stopped speaking to Gary Lawless over something he wrote (I dont know if the cone of silence is still in place).  And Gary is often negative.

Doug Brown just rubs me the wrong way.  I havent listened to him for a while because when I did I could barely last ten minutes.  Just seems like a very egotistical guy. 

 

Lawless has definitely changed quite a bit over the last few years,   on his radio show he's much more positive about the Jets and Blue then he was in years past.  

Brown to me seems just so forced when he's on the radio,  it doesn't sound natural in the way he speaks and the words he uses.   Seems so fake to me.

I much prefer most of Bobs other co-hosts who are much more natural and who don't seem to have a bitter agenda..

7 hours ago, White Out said:

The cheerleaders on this forum cant possibly understand how others are skeptical of the worst run franchise in the CFL by a country mile. Imagine that.

Personally I like my cheerleaders busty, long-legged, and wearing tight sweaters and short skirts. Now if some of the cheerleaders on this forum want to post pics of themselves in such attire I suppose we could rate them. 

Edited April 8, 20169 yr by J5V

On 08/04/2016 at 4:00 PM, J5V said:

Jonathan Toews. Winnipeg boy! Woot! Best clutch player I have seen in the last 20 years. Ice water in his veins. Super smart. Steve Izerman style of leadership. His performance in the 2007 World Juniors was superb! What a beauty! Chicago is so lucky to have him.

 

Yzerman*  ... or "a-ZERE-min" If you're Bill Clinton...

4 hours ago, bearpants said:

Yzerman*  ... or "a-ZERE-min" If you're Bill Clinton...

Yeah yeah ... 

I have been reading Doug's columns since he was hired by the Free Press. Many will consider his columns negative, I don't. I consider them to be realistic. Yes some are of the obvious some are insightful. Bottom line is what he has said in this particular piece is quite correct. It is much easier to teach defense than it is to teach offense. That being said if follows that with an influx of new players the defense will gel much quicker than the offense.

I too do not like the negative but at the same time do not like the rose coloured glasses positive approach. A much more palatable approach would be one that is more realistic than fiction. To suggest the Bombers are going to be barn burners this year???? Well that just doesn't make sense. Yes they have upgraded their personnel, they have changed coaching staff; however that being said does one think the other teams above us have not done the same? Therefore one can only assume, based on press reports from the Bombers themselves, that we have improved measurably more than those ahead of us. That remains to be seen.

Optimistic, yes as always however reality says don't jump the gun. If one was to review the past say three years, it becomes painfully obvious that this team has not improved but regressed. Why is that? Is it because we have not recruited better players? Perhaps. Is it because our starting QB has been injured? Perhaps. Is it because of poor coaching? Perhaps.  So if we assume that all three are collective reasons why we have done so poorly, one could expect an improvement this year, correct? Well only partially because we now have better personnel (we assume and have been told) , better coaches (we assume and have been told), and we have yet to find out if our starting QB will remain upright the entire season. What that does is leave the subject of gelling as a team in all three phases of the game. Should that fourth part of the puzzle come to fruition, then we can say we SHOULD improve. BUT that still has not accounted for the upgrades of those above us.

Getting back to the topic, this only says that Doug Brown is stating the obvious and provides some insight into the workings of a successful football team. He is neither negative or positive, merely state the obvious at times and raising questions at other times.

We will see who is right, remember to come back to this topic at years end to see if in fact what he has said has any merit. For me, Doug being an ex professional football player, and expounding on what he knows from experience, I'm inclined to go with him on this one.

 

Maybe folks have a bad taste in their mouth about DB because of his smugness on the radio?

For sure the fact that he comes across as a smug know it all plays a factor. I just find people who talk down to people and use words that the majority of people don't use annoying as hell. Doug comes across as someone who knows it all and is somewhat bitter 

Brown has a very high opinion of himself and the (crappy) teams he served on but he is not wrong in his observations. While everyone here is being overly optimistic he is trying to introduce a tempered view. Of course, with the brunt of the main posters here being blue goggled cheerleaders anything but a ringing endorsement of this team is going to be seen as negative. 

The Bombers made some changes that look good on paper but recent past history should tell all fans that that paper isn't worth ****. If the Bombers want positive they should provide play that is positive. It's put up or pack up time this year.

On 13/04/2016 at 11:28 PM, Goalie said:

For sure the fact that he comes across as a smug know it all plays a factor. I just find people who talk down to people and use words that the majority of people don't use annoying as hell. Doug comes across as someone who knows it all and is somewhat bitter 

To me the use of big words and trying to be overly verbose isn't about smugness, it's about a guy trying to come across as smarter than he is and it's just annoying because anyone with any kind of intelligence sees right through that crap.

On 4/8/2016 at 4:41 PM, J5V said:

Yup. Read it again today and got it. Must have been having one of those days yesterday. Sorry Zontar.  :-)

No worries.