It was nice to see a couple of roster additions this week. There is plenty of latent talent that didn't quite make the grade in other tryout camps around the CFL. See QB Dominic Davis last year.

What I am wondering is whether we have a merit based decision making process. It seems in the past once you made the starting lineup on week one, you were there to stay unless

[1] you got injured

or

[2] you repeatedly embarrassed yourself over several games

Many of the starting choices were very close choices, when the number 2 contender was behind  by only a whisker or two.

We need to make changes at DE and at DB based on performance. Will we start alternates at those two spots Friday?

Will we use judgment and merit to make changes or will we stick to loyalty/consistency/stubborness/pride to resist needed change?

What other reasons for benching someone would you suggest there are other than injury or poor play?

14 minutes ago, Mike said:

What other reasons for benching someone would you suggest there are other than injury or poor play?

Based on the past two years, none. For other clubs, perhaps for better aptitude or skill set against another club's style. And yes, to give a promising player a chance to show his stuff and perhaps go beyond mediocrity at that particular position.

what kind of message are you sending to players if you bench them for no fault of their own?

Here's how it will work:

O'Shea:  Hi Jamaal.  I just wanted to let you know that we're siting you for the game against Calgary.  It's not that we think that you can't do the job, it's just that we think that we need to give a promising player a chance to show his stuff.

Westerman: You're kidding, right?

O'Shea:  No, I know that in the rest of the football playing world, skill is the measure, but we're going to look at aptitude, skill set, and what we like to call "T-Ball style" roster management.  We're really hoping to see if by randomly inserting guys for no good reason, we might go beyond mediocrity.

Westerman:  Ya, I'll be watching the next game from home, let me know how that turns out for you.

O'Shea:  You seem upset....

You can't really run a season-long training camp if you want to have a chance to win.

1 hour ago, Mike said:

What other reasons for benching someone would you suggest there are other than injury or poor play?

"What is: Whim?"

54 minutes ago, WBBFanWest said:

Here's how it will work:

O'Shea:  Hi Jamaal.  I just wanted to let you know that we're siting you for the game against Calgary.  It's not that we think that you can't do the job, it's just that we think that we need to give a promising player a chance to show his stuff.

Westerman: You're kidding, right?

O'Shea:  No, I know that in the rest of the football playing world, skill is the measure, but we're going to look at aptitude, skill set, and what we like to call "T-Ball style" roster management.  We're really hoping to see if by randomly inserting guys for no good reason, we might go beyond mediocrity.

Westerman:  Ya, I'll be watching the next game from home, let me know how that turns out for you.

O'Shea:  You seem upset....

Green played like garbage ... so did Johnson .... If you have a promising player on the bench to replace them, don't you make the move?

When will MOS learn to play players based on merit & performance? This idea that never changing unless forced to is very demotivating for not only the second tier players but even more so for the starters

Not having a merit based system doesn't build consistency but instead brings fatalistic thinking

 

There's also something to be said for consistency  and allowing a team to jell.  Maybe it's as simple as the idea that anyone can have a bad game.  Also you might factor in that someone earns a starters spot by showing they are better than the guy backing them up so you don't just swap them out just because.  If it goes on for a while, sure maybe then you consider making a chance but not after ONE bad game.

1 minute ago, WBBFanWest said:

There's also something to be said for consistency  and allowing a team to jell.  Maybe it's as simple as the idea that anyone can have a bad game.  Also you might factor in that someone earns a starters spot by showing they are better than the guy backing them up so you don't just swap them out just because.  If it goes on for a while, sure maybe then you consider making a chance but not after ONE bad game.

Disagree ... the top performers play ... if you have been playing top end yes you can get one bad game but not two ... there is something wrong ... put two bad gamers on the 1 game IR .... if not proven, one bad game means "next!"

The whole reason we have endured certain LBs for half a season or more is the "consistency" / "gel" thing. Athletes play best when there is real competition going on and everyone knows it. Keep improving the team all year until we are "consistently" winning

1 minute ago, BigBlue said:

Disagree ... the top performers play ... if you have been playing top end yes you can get one bad game but not two ... there is something wrong ... put two bad gamers on the 1 game IR .... if not proven, one bad game means "next!"

The whole reason we have endured certain LBs for half a season or more is the "consistency" / "gel" thing. Athletes play best when there is real competition going on and everyone knows it. Keep improving the team all year until we are "consistently" winning

So then why was Bruce Johnson your example?

3 minutes ago, Mike said:

So then why was Bruce Johnson your example?

Johnson's play was egrigious ... if he's hurt change him out ... if not play him but have a DI ready to sub in if bad play continues the next game

Green has proven nothing and there is a huge hole in his skill set

11 minutes ago, BigBlue said:

Green played like garbage ... so did Johnson .... If you have a promising player on the bench to replace them, don't you make the move?

When will MOS learn to play players based on merit & performance? This idea that never changing unless forced to is very demotivating for not only the second tier players but even more so for the starters

Not having a merit based system doesn't build consistency but instead brings fatalistic thinking

 

Big Blue bud. There are a great number of assumptions in your post. 

Two guys have bad games and you want them pulled, but who is to say the promising prospect can perform any better than the vets?

MOS gets to play the players he wants cause he's the coach. He is accountable for his squads performance, weather he uses merit, a ouija board or urine samples. Not so sure he isn't taking other considerations into play as well injuries, match ups, tendencies and strengths. Who knows? Do we?

lets say the Bombers do use a merit system and green and Johnson have scored best. Then what should the home team do to have the most meritorious on the field at game day while still keeping the coaching staff accountable?

sorry. But what is fatalistic thinking?

i think we have to let the coach do his job. If he fails, work with him and still, if needed whack him.

The rookie DBs weren't the problem last week anyways. I mean they weren't  great but they weren't the reason we lost by any means. Bruce Johnson really struggled but I definitely expect him to bounce back, and Macho Harris flat out sucks. If you used him as an example you might've gained some traction.

Macho had a pretty good game Friday.

Somehow.

so just yo-yo players in and out after mistakes, cause that will get the best out of everyone. All you do then is make players afraid to do anything. 

Quote

 

I am not advocating a revolving door but MOS unwillingness to try to improve as the season progresses has held us back in my opinion. Early in the season there should be a couple of moves on most teams. A certain amount of common sense is always called for.

1 hour ago, BigBlue said:

I am not advocating a revolving door but MOS unwillingness to try to improve as the season progresses has held us back in my opinion. Early in the season there should be a couple of moves on most teams. A certain amount of common sense is always called for.

so you would rather Mos be like Corey Chamblin...one fumble and you're out. You have no merit to what you're saying at this point.

My Lord people, Johnson was playing against one of the best receiving corps. in the league and Kevin Glenn was "on" as the pass rush caused minimal disruption to his passing game.  Like Washington before him it takes an excellent athlete to play HB and shutting down the best receivers in the CFL is just not going to happen.  The CB can more or less focus on one player whereas the HB has to make a split second decision on every play which SB to track, so coverage is going to be loose at best.  Damage can be minimized with the help of a good safety but not entirely prevented.

Edited June 30, 20169 yr by Throw Long Bannatyne

On ‎2016‎-‎06‎-‎29 at 10:09 AM, Mike said:

What other reasons for benching someone would you suggest there are other than injury or poor play?

Attitude.

On 6/29/2016 at 10:09 AM, Mike said:

What other reasons for benching someone would you suggest there are other than injury or poor play?

thats all accountable and logical though. Not the stuff of starting kuale, hurl and others with better back ups. As stated attitude, missing team functions, late for practise/tape etc. Also acquiring a better player in that role. 

Can we improve and fix our problems in house? I fully believe so. Will we? I hope so. Thats the question though. If we do fix that stuff this management and coaching staff is gonna be here next year. If not I dont think any one short of wade miller will be. Or maybe thats narrower then wade...

topic title are we capable of change? I somehow think that given his area of expertise MOS will change out defensive players as per his attitude toward defense and his example of play. On offense, no. He is stubborn in this regard and it might well be the opposite from above as he doesn't know the offense, and won't change unless directed to in a very forceful manner from his coordinator and I doubt anyone will suggest that during a game. Just my opinion. 

We have a different OC this year...I don't think Lapo will have any difficulty telling MOS exactly what he wants.

1 hour ago, blitzmore said:

We have a different OC this year...I don't think Lapo will have any difficulty telling MOS exactly what he wants.

I agree.

O'Shea and LaPolice have mutual respect for each other. They already have a game plan in place based on what LaPolice wants to accomplish for that particular game. I don't see any way, where O'Shea interferes with what LaPolice wants to do. It's not a top down directive from MOS for Lapo to follow. Quite the opposite I would think.

Edited June 30, 20169 yr by Mr Dee

7 hours ago, blitzmore said:

We have a different OC this year...I don't think Lapo will have any difficulty telling MOS exactly what he wants.

this offense is allready very different then last year. I think lapo has a good bit to say in what we do and how we do it.