Interesting to say the least...
from all-star to goat in four games with the Als?
something is amiss here. :?
Hunt may be an improvement over Brown who is also an import...who knows...
Shades of Zeke Moreno and Ed O'Neil perhaps?
Hunt may have been an All-Star in the past but he did very little in Montreal. After four games, four tackles and no sacks. Moreover, he wasn't generating consistent pressure up the middle, and had been outperformed by Ventrell Jenkins at DT. I wish Aaron the best, but after the beating we took in Hamilton, everyone had to know changes were coming. We need to develop some semblance of a pass rush.
You mean Al Bundy? Not sure if high school football is relevant here.
Looking forward to "disciplineandpunish's" view on the wisdom of making big promises to land a veteran free agent, only to cut him loose at the first sign that things aren't going perfectly.
I dont think it is as black as white as you think it is. I feel like there are some underlying issues surrounding Mr. Hunt.
Trestman said today. He's a great guy, good locker room guy, had a great career this was strictly football decision. Coaching staff as a group decided that for the production they were getting from Aaron, they would go younger.
But that guy once scored 4 touchdowns, not in one season, but in one game.
gotta get me a Bundy jersey..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5xND8Cq_q4
Now that's how you defend the eye poke splitter. :cowboy:
That team is not veteran friendly.
Where have I heard this before?
Would anyone like lark to eat with their crow.
Had to add this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah5FEpGql9s
Uh, what crow? Cats fans call us an old team in one breath, then say we're not veteran-friendly on the other. :lol: Please. Hunt was released because he wasn't producing. Simple. What I objected to in the past was Obie releasing players who HAD produced just to chase the latest glitzy free agent.
"Younger" essentially means cheaper. If you are an import in this league and earning an above-average salary, you had better perform up to the level of your salary or you will be out very quickly. If Trestman determines he can get the same level of production and pay a (much) smaller salary, he would not be acting in the best interests of the Alouettes if he did not make the change. It has nothing to do with teams being "unfriendly" to vets IMO, it's simply managing and distributing the salary budget to achieve the best overall level of production for the team. Some would contend that the CFL salary management system itself is inherently punitive to higher salary players (vets) for that reason. Past accomplishments, seniority, all star selections, loyalty to the team, etc. mean little or nothing when personnel decisions must be dictated by dollars and cents.
Bang on and yes the SMS is flawed.
Is four games really enough time to decide if a player will be productive or not? That seems like too little time to judge if a player will perform up to expectations.
Being "unfriendly to veterans" really means being unfriendly to paying high salaries unnecessarily for performance levels that can be had at lower cost. That's just good management.
I guess Trestman decided otherwise. He had four games plus the preceding training camp to make his evaluation, and is also making the latest decision in light of who else he has available to do the job, and at what cost.
Oh, now I see the difference.
If Popp does it, it is because he is releasing a free agent he just signed 4 games in who didn't produce, What a brilliant move.
If Obie releases a player in the off season, it is to chase "glitzy free agents".
Man, I see now why Popp is so much better than Obie. :roll:
No. Popp has FOUR Grey Cups as a GM to Obilovich's ZERO. Bedder is bedder