7 Eastern All Stars

Wow, congrats to those nominated as eastern all-stars!
Is this the first time ever that a team with 7 all-stars didn't
make the play-offs? Can't wait until July

Only 1 on defense. Main reason why they are out of playoffs/last place in East.

Richard

Rey Williams - an eastern all-star? What is it that we in the Hammer don't see? People on this site have been negative about his play all season. He appears to be out of position all of the time. Opposing running backs (Cornish, Owens etc. ) have racked up huge yards against us, when the running back is the responsibility of the middle linebacker. Are the other middle linebackers in the east worse? How is this possible?

Was surprised when I first saw the list of All-Star Cats at Cobourne being one, but then realized that he's the second back choice after Simpson and I agree with that. While impressed with Bartel's rookie season, I am surprised at him being selected over Waters and Whyte.

[url=http://cfl.ca/statistics/league/stat/Punting/year/2012/type/reg]http://cfl.ca/statistics/league/stat/Pu ... 2/type/reg[/url]

I think that some of our players made the eastern all star team in an effort for those who voted to keep

interest up in Hamilton following another deplorable season. Like you, I really have to question the

validity of some of these recipients.

Owens isn't a running back and all-star selections aren't divvied up between SAM, MIKE and WILL linebackers. Just the best three are chosen. Also, the pick of Williams wasn't exclusively a Hamilton thing. Fans from around the country, as well as coaches and those that make up the FRC voted for the players. They believe that Williams is one of the three best LBs in the East Division.

I know I'll probably get killed for this, but I think Henry Burris not making the team validates a lot of claims made by guys like FenderGuy69 about this not being Burris' best year. I was a little surprised not to see him listed because his positives numbers (yards, TDs, etc.) were outstanding, but it seems pretty clear that those that voted -- and remember, this wasn't just the fans -- didn't feel the good outweighed the bad.

Correction: The league all-star spots don't split up the linebackers, but the division ones do. I apologize for my error.

I wonder how the voting would have been affected if our defense averaged 19 points a game like in BC and if the Cat's finished 1st in the East. Would that then validate their league leading offensive output?

That's a question for those that voted. Clearly, despite posting career-best numbers, the fans, coaches and members of the FRC didn't see Burris as worthy of an all-star selection. I was surprised -- I had him pencilled in as the all-star QB from the East -- but there is a reason why he wasn't picked. Fans tend to look at numbers, and taking away team biases, I think the majority of votes would go to Burris. That leads me to believe that it was the coaches and/or writers that didn't like what they saw from Burris this season. We'll never know the answer, but if Burris was as otherworldly as his defenders make him out to be, he would have been a slam dunk for a divisional all-star spot. I think it was as snub -- again, I would have picked him -- but Burris not being chosen does give those critical of him validation. Clearly others, and ones that people tend to hold in very high esteem, saw what they saw.

And for the record, Montreal's defense gave up over 27 points per game. Yes, they finished first, but clearly voters didn't hold Calvillo's poor defense against him. Also, six other members of the Ti-Cats made the team, so there wasn't much of a bias against picking players from a last-place team. To me, it just points to the voters thinking that the negatives (mainly, in my opinion, the high number of turnovers) outweighed the positives (incredible touchdown and yardage totals) when it came to Burris' 2012 campaign. Rightly or wrongly, he wasn't an all star and that says a lot considering the numbers he put up.

As you say, “Fans tend to look at numbers.” And with most players, it’s the individual stats they look at, yards receiving, yards rushing, number of tackles, number of field goals, etc. But with quarterbacks, a lot of people, fans and reporters, look at a different number first - number of wins. Because as everyone knows, whether the team wins or loses is all down to the quarterback. Right? And according to that one stat, Burris was the worst quarterback in the league.

Too bad the people voting didn’t consider points scored vs. points directly attributable to the offence, i.e. points scored by the other team after getting the ball on a turnover in our end. Any points scored after a turnover in their own end would probably have happened anyway after the kickoff. How does Burris compare on that basis to the other quarterbacks in the league?

You'll find no bigger proponent of getting rid of "QB wins" as a stat/talking point than myself. It is a ridiculous stat and one that needs to be done away with ASAP. Because while Burris was the worst QB because of wins, he wasn't the worst QB, not a long shot, based on any other metric (other than turnovers, obviously).

As per the second part of your query, I don't have an answer for that. Maybe (hopefully?) someone with some time on their hands can look this up. I'd be interested in seeing that as well. (My guess is Burris would be at or near the top the league simply because he had the most turnovers.)

Bartel’s net punting average was better than Whyte’s, as you can see here: http://www.cfl.ca/statistics/league/sta … /year/2012

But as you can also see there, Waters had a net punting average that was better than Bartel’s. I thought Bartel was named to the all-star team rather than Waters because Waters did not play that close to a full season. Then again, Cobourne missed about half a season and was named to the all-star team.

But in any case, I thought Bartel had a good rookie year.

Anyway, Drew made an interesting point about how the number of all-stars this team had is greater than the number of wins that it had. There is that phrase about how teams should add one loss to their record for every rookie they start. Well, apparently they can’t add a win for every all-star they have.

I suppose that’s the way the 2012 Hamilton Tiger-Cats were: Very good players on a rather bad team.