Ken Peters tells it like it is !!!!!!

I'd try not to talk to walls! :lol:

You guys deserve each other..... :o :lol:

Have a nice day... :roll:

The Cats are improving each game but lets be honest Winnipeg should not be able to beat us when you look at both teams off season additions;if they do what are the underlying reasons.
We can;t be content with just keeping games close we have to start winning and right now dammit.

Pardon me for one more post regarding Ken's Attitude Adjustment.

If I knew I was going to set off such a firestorm, I would have said that

Ken should be be given 40 lashes with a wet noodle,

but how would a dinosaur like me know?

Re: your quote from Peters - I took it to mean that they lack the ability to “put teams away” so they’re putting in good efforts and falling short (with an L) - they play well for a half, or three quarters, or even more but, when they must move the ball forty yards in 15 seconds, they don’t while, when their opponent must take the ball forty yards in fifteen seconds, they do. Which is an accurate analysis of what has happened at least three times so far this year so far this year (against Toronto, Calgary and Montreal). Against some great teams and players, no doubt, but I think that analysis is fair.

Re: the rest of the post, I think you’re reading context into my post that wasn’t there. My comment re: taking plays off was a general comment about football players, not a specific analysis of the 2006 Ticats. But yes, since IMO most teams in most games have players that take plays off, my comment applies to them as well.

In all your years watching football, have you never seen any of the following: a secondary receiver not come back to offer himself as a target when his QB is chased out of the pocket. Or a reciever throw a half-hearted block on a guy that goes on to make the tackle or strip the ball. Or a receiver break off a pattern early and have the QB throw to where he was supposed to be. Or a reciever go out of bounds early and for no reason. Or a tackler slow down as he angles a reciever/returner out of bounds, only to have that guy slip the tackle and go all the way. Or a tackler give up the chase when the guy gets two steps on him. Or a tackler go for a soft arm tackle only have the guy go another thirty yards. I call that taking a play off and I see it every week. I’m not condemning the players for being human - Lord knows I can’t do what they do -my point was just that they do it but they don’t see it that way and they certainly don’t admit to it publicly.

IMO, overall, this team has fought like hell the past three weeks. I’ve said so in other posts.

I defended Peters not because I agree with him, but because:
-it’s his job to reports what he sees and thinks he sees, not to mail valentines to the players and fans
-I don’t see 1/10th of what KP does. I can allow that he may see things in visiting the stadium every day that I don’t see on my television or from thirty rows up. Whether I want it to be true or not.

Kind of anti-climatic, responding to this after another insightful mudfight between Mikey and the gang of five. But here goes anyway.

Wow

A well reasoned post from someone on this board. Are you lost?

Regarding the team putting in an effort but falling short, Sec8since72.
I think you may have surmised it from what Ken said but it is actually your opinion.
I agree with it too, but I didn't see any evidence that Ken said anything specific
about players who gave an effort and fell short or players who didn't give an effort. You give Ken too much credit for analyzing something.

Regarding taking plays off. Rather than tarring these players with the same brush, Since this article was labelled an Analysis Ken should name the players who do not try. I personally haven't noticed any players who aren't trying hard.

Ken is a writer. I don't want to hear Ken rant
I can get all of that that I want on ticats.ca.

Inform me, educate me...probe deeper.

He called them out as a whole. This could actually be a blessing. A lot of self reflection is required to correct the type of problem the Cats are facing and maybe this will help start that process. I honestly believe thats what Peters was after.

Out of curiousity, since this is one specific issue that Peters talked about, what do the posters here think about players going out to a strip club, or nightclub, after a loss on the road? Does it suggest they don't care enough? Should the team have any say in it? Thoughts?

Along those line, turbo

Here is John Wooden’s definition of success

Keeping all these in mind, I finally coined my definition in 1934.

Success is peace of mind that is the direct result of self-satisfaction in knowing
[that] you did your best to become the best that you are capable of becoming.

Furthermore, only one person can ultimately judge the level of your success – you.

Think about that for a moment.

I believe that is what true success is.

Anything stemming from that success is simply a by-product,

whether it be the score, the trophy, a national championship, fame, or fortune.

They are all by-products of success rather than success itself,
indicators that you perhaps succeeded in the more important contest.

That real contest, of course, is striving to reach your personal best,
and that is totally under your control.

When you achieve that, you have achieved success. Period!

You are a winner and only you fully know if you won.

Google John Wooden…

10 national basketball championships in the 60’s? 70’s

Can't argue with a word of that. Self reflection is required to be a winner by any definition apparently. Its not like that guy didn't know a thing or 2 about success. IMO the Cats seem to be selling themselves short.

i must say i really dont have a problem with players going to strip clubs and such after a lose because it is their lives, they can do whatever they want. And if any of you really care how they handle a lose, find something mire important to ahve your lives revolve around seriously. And just forget about KP people hes just a troll

Kind of anti-climatic, responding to this after another insightful mudfight between Mikey and the gang of five. But here goes anyway.
I take exception to that comment!

Membership records show that its the “gang of 1193” as uf July 15th, 2006.

Not sure I get what the number 1193 refers to, Crash.

The number of posts that have devolved into personal battles between you guys?

The number of times both sides have laid out the exact same arguments in defence of your hi-jacking of this board?

Or maybe 1193 refers to a year during the late Middle Ages, a period that may or may not provide inspiration for you in that this type of feudalism was no doubt de riguer during that time.

A quick google search on the term Middle Ages reveals the following:

“people in the Middle Ages formed small communities around a central lord or master.”

Sounds about right. All hail Lord Zontar :wink:

Not sure I get what the number 1193 refers to, Crash. The number of posts that have devolved into personal battles between you guys?
I havnt kept track, it COULD actually be that many.
The number of times both sides have laid out the exact same arguments in defence of your hi-jacking of this board?
If this the case, and i think it is... you are exactly right, 1193 times mikey has called out a player, coach, or players family... and 1193 times he's been asked to simply explain.... low and behold, 1193 times he completely ignores the issue and doesnt clarify...
"people in the Middle Ages formed small communities around a central lord or master."

Sounds about right. All hail Lord Zontar


You’re close, but i choose to hail the one person that i completely respect… the one person that has knows more about football and building championship football teams than everyone on this board combined… and the one person you will NEVER see me say anything about.

http://www.spwolverines.com/images/lancaster_000.jpg

Section8

Is it that hard to take a stand on an issue? Strolling down the cafeteria line of other peoples' ideas with a ladel of this and a spoonfull of that isnt doesnt make for interesting on insightfull reading.

So far the vast majority of people havnt so much as disagreeed with some of the things pointed out in the article as was the style and tone that is the issue.

He comes off petty and vindictive, full of spite. No, its not his job to give out bouquets but he still has to act like a professional.He wrote it like he was trying to get fired.
His column was the journalisitc equivalent of graffiti on the bathroom wall by a teenage girl trying to get back at someone.

And you, by extension, have now pointed out your opinion on that for us 1194 times. But who’s counting. And thanks for that - maybe I’ll get it one of these days.

BTW, I know I don’t have to read it if I don’t like it - if the developers of this board could build in a feature where a special icon showed on the left of any thread that eventually devolves into a private argument between Mikey and any two ro more of the gang of 5, I could then choose to skip them.

Hardly the highest praise you could offer … in all likelihood, more people caught the 7:10 showing of You, Me and Dupree at the Upper James Cinema last night than post on this board. And there wasn’t a lot of professional GM experience in that crowd either. But I think I get your drift.

Not too much there I’d disagree with. Actually, the “trying to get fired” thing occurred to me as well.

I’m a bit of a journalism junkie and I don’t think much of Peters as a journalist.

I just thought it was interesting to see him go off the rails like a passionate and irate fan, when so many sports journalists adopt the affectation of being a) part of the organization or b) above it all.

Most of my reponses on this were actually in response to other posters that feel the Ticats would do well to war with the Spec or encourage their employees to intimidate/shut out Peters.

Fans have the right to disagree with/not respect KP, but KP and his employer write/print tens of thousands of words of promotion for the team each year, so shutting them out is a bit of an over-reaction to one blown fuse.

BTW, could the Barranachea piece this morning be a response to whichever poster claimed that Peters wouldn’t dare speak to Auggie, presumably for fear of being beaten up. Probably not but ya never know.

The Barrenchea story is still run of the mill Peters stuff . The quotes in the article were still safe and cliche. Far more interesting if he said "I think the coach is wrong, I'm better than Brooks" or "play me or trade me". Now that would be a real story.
Who knows if it was Peters own story he could have been in a mini scrum with Zamperin etc.

Lots of reporters use cliches, nicknames, etc. and rarely, if ever, have I ever heard anyone complain about them:
How about: Night Train Lane, The King of Swat, The Bambino, Boom Boom Jeffreon,
PIGSKIN, ETC. Hocky pucks have been referred to as discs, basketballs are round balls.
Then there was the Flying Dutchman, The Four Horsemen, from Notre Dame and needless to say, I could go on all night with this stuff.
These expressions are intended for folks like ourselves (Ken Peters included) that know a thing or two about these specific sports.
My question to you would be, "Why jump all over the guy for doing what dozens of sports reporters have done before him"?
He does tend to bare his soul at times, which seems a little unprofessional to some of you. Personally, I admire his guts and his honest approach.
It's a sizeable job trying to make the Hamilton Ticats look good these days and there really aren't a whole lot of nice things for an objective sports writer to say on this issue.
Keep up the good work, Ken.