Up close with Blue Bombers general manager Kyle Walters: "We just need to grow a little bit more."

Blue boss reflects on three years at the helm, tees up the upcoming draft and talks about his team's revamped offence

 

Kyle Walters is three years into his time at the helm of the Winnipeg Blue Bombers and the tangible results aren’t pretty.

The Bombers have a 14-34 record and a .354 winning percentage during his time as general manager and have missed the playoffs each season.

There is renewed optimism as training camp approaches this year after Walters revamped the team’s offence through big spending in free agency, but only time will tell if that is enough to make this team even a contender for a playoff spot, let alone a Grey Cup.

Winnipeg Sun sports editor Ted Wyman sat down with Walters, the 42-year-old GM from St. Thomas, Ont., on Wednesday to address a wide variety of topics, from player personnel to the coming CFL draft, to what he does when he’s away from the work.

TW: How would you assess your first three years on the job?

KW: The ultimate grading is wins and losses. We haven’t won a lot, so as an organization we’re not doing enough. In our line of work, you win or you lose and we haven’t won enough football games. That being said, I do believe we’re building properly and each year adding a little bit here and a little bit there and trying to build continuity within the organization as we rebuild, which is always the challenge and the fine line we’re working on … you just can’t keep blowing everything up every year and thinking that the results will come. I believe in (coach) Mike (O’Shea) and I believe in the organization, in (president and CEO) Wade (Miller) and we just need to kind of grow a little bit more and win some football games.

TW: Do you put pressure on yourself to get this team to a point where it can contend for a Grey Cup and end that 25-year drought?

KW: Of course, that’s the pressure all of us put on ourselves, from Wade and Mike and everybody in the organization. There’s nothing wrong with that. We were hired to bring Grey Cups to this city and that’s what we’re working toward. Feeling the pressure to do it is not a bad thing.

TW: Talking to (Winnipeg Jets) GM Kevin Cheveldayoff fairly often, he talks a lot about the process. You still have to stick to that, right? You can’t let the pressure affect the way you do things?

KW: You still have to make big picture organizational decisions. We need to build long-term sustainable success while still trying to win short term. In the back of my mind is everything we’re trying to do here is big-picture, organizational growth to sustain winning. But we’ve got to get some wins on the field short term.

TW: You said a couple of months ago that the team needed better players on the offensive side of the ball. Do you feel like you can now say you do have those better players after the free agency period?

KW: I think after free agency, yes. When you look at this roster that I have in front of me, it’s vastly different from what it was and we’re constantly trying to improve it. We’ve added some CFL experience, we’ve added some productivity. On paper, the talent seems to have improved but now it’s ‘Can we gel as a group, how quickly can we get them up to speed with our new offensive co-ordinator (Paul LaPolice) and that sort of stuff.’ It’s not quite as cut and dried as ‘We went out, spent money and brought in better players and that translates instantly into winning.’

TW: I was talking to (Bombers president and CEO) Wade Miller this morning and he said it was one of the best free agency periods ever for a Blue Bombers team. How do you feel when you hear a comment like that?

KW: That’s fantastic for Wade and the business people that there’s an excitement generated in the off-season by bringing in talented football players. But ultimately, it has to translate on the football field or else it’s irrelevant.

TW: At last report the Saskatchewan Roughriders were still weighing their options on whether to keep or trade the first overall pick in the draft. Does that intrigue you?

KW: I don’t think so. At this point we’re well into the draft process and we’ll wrap up our meetings to finalize things at the end of this week. It’s so murky with the players who are going to have NFL interest that there’s no real clear-cut pecking order at the top. I would say no, we’re not overly interested in that No. 1 pick but we’ll see how things shake down.

TW: Are you pretty happy with those picks at No. 9 and No. 10 or would you look to move up at all?

KW: For sure. The big determining factor is going to be after the NFL Draft. On our draft board there are five or six names of players who are going to be fringe NFL guys. So do they get drafted, do they sign as free agents? It’s going to be a real interesting week from the NFL Draft to our draft. Everyone’s thought process is going to drastically be shaken up after that.

TW: Anybody targeting your picks?

KW: There’s always talk. We would be a primary target for somebody who wants to drop down and see if they can grab our No. 9 and No. 10 for a top-6 pick. I’ve had a couple of calls about that but I’m not comfortable yet with where that cutoff is, as in ‘We have to get to this pick to get a guy we like.’ Nothing is going to get done until after the NFL Draft because there is just so much uncertainty right now with those players.

TW: How tough is it to make a call, letting players like Bryant Turner and Clarence Denmark go from the organization?

KW: It’s very difficult. Bryant and Clarence have been pillars of this organization, they’ve been outstanding young men on and off the field, they’ve been pillars of the community and they’ve done everything we asked of them. Unfortunately, in our line of work, when you are losing, things need to change. When you add players there’s a hard cap and the reality of this line of work is you have to make tough decisions that you think are best for the organization. Those were two of them.

TW: How many more roster spots do you have available for camp?

KW: The big challenge right now will be to make sure we get the best 75 guys into training camp. There will still be a lot of work. We’ll have our offensive mini-camp up here April 25-27 and all the offensive players under contract will be there. We’re making a real push right now to get these last few guys on our neg list under contract, see if we can get their passports sorted out and get them into Winnipeg on the 25th. There’s going to be no defence out there, just the offensive players, so hopefully we’re going to get a good read on some of these younger guys. Everyone you are going to see there, from Drew Willy on down is going to have a contract and we expect them to be in training camp barring some unforeseen injury.

TW: Speaking of Drew Willy, he says he’s healthy and raring to go for mini-camp, training camp and the season. What will it mean to you to have that No. 1 quarterback back?

KW: It means everything. When Drew’s been healthy we win football games, it’s that simple. Now it’s on Paul (LaPolice) and (offensive line coach) Bob (Wylie) and (running backs coach) Avon (Cobourne) and (quarterbacks coach) Buck (Pierce), all that offensive staff, to get Drew making quicker decisions, put an offensive plan in place where he can make quick decisions. Drew’s got to understand sometimes throwing a ball out of bounds or an incompletion is better than taking a hit. He’s a competitor and he’s a young guy and he’s learning that, so there’s a growth to it. He so desperately wants to make a play every single snap that he puts himself in jeopardy from time to time. He needs to understand that sometimes punting on third down is not a bad thing.

TW: How much will it mean to have an experienced backup in Matt Nichols around as well?

KW: That is critically important. When we sat down at the end of last year and said ‘What’s the key?’ the obvious ones were depth here, more Canadian talent there. But it was clear that we wanted to have a No. 2 quarterback we were comfortable with who could win us some football games. Matt made a very good impression on us around here. It seemed he was snakebitten down the stetch where he played well enough for us to win football games and we didn’t do it for him. When Paul sat down and looked at all the film, he said Matt was the guy we needed to have back. It’s comforting to know you are going to have two veteran guys in training camp.

TW: All of the free agents you brought in have pretty good track records in this league. It must be exciting for you to have a chance to see them in action?

KW: I can’t wait for the 25th. This year it’s critically important that we win – as it always is -- and it’s nice for Paul to have veteran guys to work with on the offensive side of the ball so the learning curve will be less. Andrew Harris, who is a pro and as sharp as any player there is in this league, will pick things up and Ryan Smith and Weston (Dressler) are going to provide really nice leadership on that offensive side of the ball.

TW: Touching on something you said about Andrew Harris. Being a hometown guy with some star power, do you think he’ll feel any extra pressure to perform?

KW: No, not at all. I think a knock on Andrew was when things weren’t going his way, he would kinda get down a little bit, which is not a bad thing. When you are not getting the ball as much as you want and your team is not performing offensively, there’s nothing wrong with having a player get upset. Clearly, out in Vancouver, Andrew put that pressure on himself to be the best Canadian in the league to be the best offensive player in the league. I don’t see that being any different here. He’s been around the league long enough. He’ll put pressure on himself whether he’s in Vancouver or Montreal or anywhere in between, to be the best football player he can possibly be.

TW: Mike O’Shea is starting his third year here. The wins haven’t been there but what has he done that has really impressed you?

KW: The respect he commands in that locker room among the players and the way he treats the players like men, never throws them under the bus publicly, carries himself like a head coach should. He represents our organization the way a head coach should. He’s proud to be the head coach and handles himself professionally at all times. The scouting department and myself need to give him the tools to succeed and we need to keep those guys healthy. We are on the verge, we all believe that. I believe in Mike wholeheartedly. We just need to now go out and put it on the field and win some football games.

TW: This team has a Canadian GM and a Canadian head coach. Is that something you are proud of, being someone who has grown up and worked around Canadian football for most of your life?

KW: You don’t really think about it, but there’s real passion for this league growing up in Canada and following it, playing high school football in Canada, university football in Canada, playing in the CFL, working in the Canadian college system … I love the CFL, I love being Canadian and there’s a real sense of pride to be in this position, being a Canadian.

TW: It’s a pretty high stress job and it doesn’t slow down too often, so what do you do to relax and how often do you get a chance to do it?

KW: just went through our kids’ spring itinerary. They’ll be nine and seven, my son and daughter, they’re both playing flag football this spring, they’re both playing soccer and he’s playing basketball. I’m helping coach two of the teams and my wife’s the head coach of the basketball team. So, what I do away from work is coach my kids and support them in whatever they are doing.

1 hour ago, J5V said:

Other than Sask we were dead last in passing yards surrendered and yards per pass surrendered and that, to you, makes our secondary the envy of most teams in the league. Magic.

If you can't consistently pressure opposing qbs it doesn't really matter who you have in your secondary, they're going to give up yards. The Bombers DL was pretty bad last year. 

This is quite the thread...I think the most amazing thing is the number of posts that WEREN'T deleted......

3 hours ago, J5V said:

Other than Sask we were dead last in passing yards surrendered and yards per pass surrendered and that, to you, makes our secondary the envy of most teams in the league. Magic.

just another post that highlights just how little you know about the game.

5 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

Is our secondary really that good? Adams is a shutdown corner and Randle was a shutdown corner before his injury, so assuming he's OK that's 2 very high level players. Johnson is loved by some around here but I don't put him in the top level category.

We don't know yet if Randle will be a corner this year or if we need to keep a NI on the field which basically means Bucknor who isn't great by any stretch of the imagination. We don't know who the safety will be, but it looks like Macho Harris has the inside track and he's never going to even be average. We have a free DB spot that Washington played for most of last year... Randle or Adams means finding a new CB or Bucknor gets to play. A newbie may be anywhere from terrible to great.

Oshea said he would be going back to corner this year. We don't know for certain that Adams will remain a corner or move to Washingtons spot.

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

If you can't consistently pressure opposing qbs it doesn't really matter who you have in your secondary, they're going to give up yards. The Bombers DL was pretty bad last year. 

The O was equally as bad so that would play a role also. How many 2 and outs? 

1 hour ago, Goalie said:

The O was equally as bad so that would play a role also. How many 2 and outs? 

Equal is far too equal, they were sub-equal.

8 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

Who do you think has the inside track at safety then?

We have a couple DBs that were around last year in Kearney and Posey and multiple rookies to choose from... it will be one of them.  I just don't think Harris has the speed to play safety and I don't think he's even being considered for that spot.  And I don't think we use a Canadian either.

While lack of pressure did play a role the secondary was still not good. They couldn't cover medium or crossing routes. Took tons of penalties on deep routes. Blaming the d-line for the shortcomings of the secondary is reaching though. It like blaming the o-line solely for the sacks. 

13 hours ago, 17to85 said:

If you can't consistently pressure opposing qbs it doesn't really matter who you have in your secondary, they're going to give up yards. The Bombers DL was pretty bad last year. 

And yet, at the end of the season, a reporter rated the D-line a C+ and the Secondary a D- . Interesting.

11 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

just another post that highlights just how little you know about the game.

I know what I saw, which was a secondary that got lit up repeatedly. Now it could be that they're really, really good and I just don't know what I'm talking about, as you suggest, but I tend to trust what I see. 

6 hours ago, Dragon37 said:

While lack of pressure did play a role the secondary was still not good. They couldn't cover medium or crossing routes. Took tons of penalties on deep routes. Blaming the d-line for the shortcomings of the secondary is reaching though. It like blaming the o-line solely for the sacks. 

I tend to agree and the statistics support your contention that they just weren't very good. I don't recall seeing many "coverage sacks" last year.

12 hours ago, Noeller said:

This is quite the thread...I think the most amazing thing is the number of posts that WEREN'T deleted......

Because deleting posts is such an effective means of stimulating conversation in a forum of this nature at this time of year.

Who is playing which position evolves more out of the distribution of the ratio then what some seem to think is a popularity contest. The biggest problem isn't necessarily a lack of potential 7 NIP starters, it is the necessary depth to support them. It becomes more problematic when losing a NIP starter results in a subsequent 2 or 3 changes at other spots to adjust

53 minutes ago, DR. CFL said:

Who is playing which position evolves more out of the distribution of the ratio then what some seem to think is a popularity contest. The biggest problem isn't necessarily a lack of potential 7 NIP starters, it is the necessary depth to support them. It becomes more problematic when losing a NIP starter results in a subsequent 2 or 3 changes at other spots to adjust

I think we're in the best position we've been in that regard for quite some time.  In 2014 our 7th and 8th best Canadians were guys like Jake Thomas and Teague Sherman.  I like those guys but they should be farther from the starting lineup than that.  Now we've got Hurl, Bucknor, JFG, Keeping all outside our starting 7.... And still a couple high draft picks to come, along with Thomas and Sherman still being here.  

The starters are way better than they were, but the depth is coming along too.  And it's not just a small improvement in the starters... Check out our top 5 Canadians now compared to who they may have been in 2014:

Westerman, Harris, Shologan, Chungh, Kohlert

Vs

Watson, Greaves, Morley, Bucknor, Kohlert

Gotta feel good about that!

I don't dispute that there is now a significant upgrade in the quality of NIP starters. My concern is the downgrade or shuffles that result when there is an injury. Harris goes down and he is likely replaced by a DI import that now results in a NIP add somewhere else. Westerman or Sholugun go down and Thomas becomes a full time guy. Any significant injury carries into subsequent    games. Historically. Yes back in the day, depth was critical but players ability to play multiple spots was also a huge advantage.

 

23 minutes ago, DR. CFL said:

I don't dispute that there is now a significant upgrade in the quality of NIP starters. My concern is the downgrade or shuffles that result when there is an injury. Harris goes down and he is likely replaced by a DI import that now results in a NIP add somewhere else. Westerman or Sholugun go down and Thomas becomes a full time guy. Any significant injury carries into subsequent    games. Historically. Yes back in the day, depth was critical but players ability to play multiple spots was also a huge advantage.

 

You basically just described the problem every team in the CFL has... it's called the ratio...

2 hours ago, J5V said:

And yet, at the end of the season, a reporter rated the D-line a C+ and the Secondary a D- . Interesting.

A reporter said that? Case closed.

34 minutes ago, DR. CFL said:

I don't dispute that there is now a significant upgrade in the quality of NIP starters. My concern is the downgrade or shuffles that result when there is an injury. Harris goes down and he is likely replaced by a DI import that now results in a NIP add somewhere else. Westerman or Sholugun go down and Thomas becomes a full time guy. Any significant injury carries into subsequent    games. Historically. Yes back in the day, depth was critical but players ability to play multiple spots was also a huge advantage.

 

Right.  I meant to focus on the depth but I got carried away about the starters.  I mean, you can say the depth isn't great but do other teams have 10 quality Canadian starters?  Once you get down into that 7-10 range, every team is going to be questionable.

Say we start Goossen, Neufeld, Chungh, Kohlert, Harris, Westerman, Shologan.  Anyone goes down, we have Hurl, Bucknor, JFG, Keeping, and Thomas on the bench.  All guys who have started games, in some cases dozens of games.  Are they ever going to be allstars?  No... but they can be pretty damn good backups to fill in for a few games.  If Harris or Westerman go down, we don't have a direct backup for them so you have to shuffle the lineup a bit.  But the other spots are covered.  OL is a little thin but the draft should help with that.

4 hours ago, J5V said:

Because deleting posts is such an effective means of stimulating conversation in a forum of this nature at this time of year.

Oh I'm aware

4 hours ago, J5V said:

I know what I saw, which was a secondary that got lit up repeatedly. Now it could be that they're really, really good and I just don't know what I'm talking about, as you suggest, but I tend to trust what I see. 

There are just too many variables to say that they themselves were horrible. Play called, and pressure up front being two big ones. You can be Deion sanders, but if the QB has 7 seconds to throw, good luck! Re watching the tape, our DB had excellent coverage often, but as the play went on, and broke down its literally impossible to cover everyone all the time. Hell I could beat Johnny Adams if the qb had enough time to throw the ball (sure he might need like a minute but still). Our weakest links were likely Washington and Johnson. Though they also did a lot of good things last year. 

7 hours ago, J5V said:

And yet, at the end of the season, a reporter rated the D-line a C+ and the Secondary a D- . Interesting.

A reporter? Oh my stars this changes everything!!!! Which reporter? Cause most of the reporters in Winnipeg can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground. 

2 hours ago, Noeller said:

Oh I'm aware

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

A reporter? Oh my stars this changes everything!!!! Which reporter? Cause most of the reporters in Winnipeg can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground. 

yea going by a reporter's belief might as well be as wise as going by the comments in said reporter's article.

 

 

This discussion about the Bombers secondary has been going on for awhile now. Our secondary is the strength of our defense. It's our Front 7 that's the problem. We don't pressure the qb enough. We didn't have the personnel on the defensive line to have anywhere near the strongest pass rush in 2015. I don't care how good a secondary we have. if we don't pressure the qb then they are going to struggle as qbs will pick them apart. Remember, football is the ultimate team sport. All 12 players have to be functioning as a unit. if one area breaks down then it affects everyone else. Fix the pass rush & our secondary will look like all stars.

but pass yards given up