Players of the Week

You are right Derex there is no whinning. R&W stated it would have been a feel good ending for the week. No big deal but it seems there are some priders here that wish to hang him for his opinion. Pathetic at best if you ask me.

...can't hang me, I'm already hung....[cue cymbal, cue bass].....

:lol: :lol: It must be the Calgary drinking water! :lol: :lol:

...for debate's sake, let's look at another award....Levingston's....

....granted he set a record, but aside from one nifty move near the goal line the guy runs unimpeded to the other end, not by necessarily his own skill, but because 10 of the 12 Lions on the field either began trotting off to the sidelines before the play was over or the TO blockers put them on their bums....so did Bashear REALLY do anything spectacular like a Devon Hester runback....no....he set a record yes, but in a very casual manner...

He also played on the kick cover team and made a TD saving tackle on Smart. He contributed on both sides of the ball in a very tight game.

It was a questionable pick I would agree. There were quite a few Canadian players who had better weeks but someone on the CFL staff who picks these wanted to add to the kids fantastic storybook first game. I don't think anyone's upset, but he probably shouldn't have gotten it.

Sorry, Red, but I have to agree that Cote's award was a bit insulting to guys like Lumsden, Cahoon, or Glatt, or any number of Canadians playing the game and doing so at a high level.
You are basing his selection on the great story behind this kid even making the team.
It was great to see the kid get an opportunity, and great he got a touchdown.
But really? Canadian of the week?
And what was that one justification? Playing above expectations should factor in? How'd you phrase it--"above and beyond"? Since when?
Based on that scenario, Kamau Peterson was easily the player of the week....
Sorry. The award is a comparison award--"that Canadian played better than any other Canadian this week"
Not "that Canadian has never personally played that well before, so he deserves an award"

I wonder which undrafted Canuck will get the award next week just for being there......?

If the criteria for choosing Cote as Canadian Player of the Week was the fact that he is a local boy to the team that he plays on, and over came odds to even make the team, then they should change the name of the award. It should be "local Canadian boy with no formal college football experience" Player of the Week. Canadians such as Lumsden would not qualify for winning this award, because he has American College experience. Other than that, I don't see how Cote's 23 yards of offence was chosen over Lumsden's 100+ yards offence. They are both "Canadian". At the end of the year, if Lumsden has 1,200 yards rushing, and Cote has 300 yards rushing, should Cote qualify for Canadian of the Year award, because he overcame odds to stay on the team all year? And don't forget that he is local. That is important in these awards. If he were playing for any other team than Calgary, he wouldn't have qualified, as he wouldn't have grown up within the required radius of the team he plays for. Yup, makes sense to me.

....quick overview....and i watch every play with a great deal of diligence.....the kid deserved the weekly annointment...this guy had a start most imports dream about....good on him.....but back-it-up next game with the same play.....and heh .....you might be on to something.....how brief fleeting fame....lol lol... :wink: :wink:

…Qualify?, yup, absolutely, and Lumsden would probably and deservedly win…

…ah larry, expounding on a subject with your own twist which isn’t actually there…

.....so you're basically saying that Cote's level of play is not at high level....really....I'd say to crack our roster would have to be a pretty high level....but I suppose you've studied game film and understand the goings-on of the Stampeder offence system to opininate that this kid has somehow sympathied his way onto the squad and then out of sympathy (there's a word overused int his thread) called upon by his OC and helped along by his teammates to try to score a major for his team, oh, and Hamilton just laid down for him to do so, because, you know, he's a special circumstance, he's got a special background, he's the freaking Rudy of the league I guess....and I suppose you've contacted Lumsden, Cahoon and Glatt, and they have it out for Cote, damn bastard isn't even fit to be on the same field as us....omg Arius, talk about ridiculous....I'll counter your argument that those three guys are actually HAPPY for Cote, for his story, for his effort....

Well, RedandWhite, considering it was YOU that put the "local boy does good against all odds" twist on the POTW selection, I'm curious as to how you think it was me? Bottom line is, 23 yards offence is a pretty pathetic excuse to choose someone as a player of the week in a "professional" football league. That only leaves the spin that YOU pointed out, which is the "feel good" factor that he is a hometown boy does good. To me, this is a silly reason for a Player of the Week selection. As I asked, if the "feel good" variable is a major factor in choosing players of the week, then perhaps we should use the same criteria for player of the year. If the league wants to look goofy, then go big or go home.

....larry ...how come every time i come on here you're NOT smilin'.....you should be, with the tie we afforded you last game....c'mon mate......turn that frown upside down.......and also give credit where credit is due.....the 'kid'(cote) played good :wink: :smiley:

...larry, I didn't say you made up the local kid thingy, I know full well I did...you were the one that somehow made it into criteria for the Player of the Year Award...the 'twist' that wasn't there....

RW, when questioned on why Cote's 23 yards from scrimmage was chosen over Lumsden's 124 yards from scrimmage for the "Canadian of the Week" Award, the best you could come up with is that we are over looking the "local boy does good" angle, and that is somehow more relevant than the 101 yard difference in their games. They are both Canadian. One had a monster game. One had a forgettable game for all but him and his family. If you have now thought of a better reason why Cote was chosen over Lumsden, I'd love to hear it. Until then, it was YOU that suggested the local boy angle was justified in playing some angle in the decision. If that "twist" isn't there, then I'd love to hear what you've come up with since.

As for extrapolating that to Canadian Player of the Year award, I don't see how this is such a stretch for your mind. The criteria is the same for both. In theory, Player of the Week is awarded to the player that had the best performance that week. Player of the Year is awarded to the player that had the best performance for that season. If you think that "local boy does good" is a justifiable reason to award a POTW award, rather than who actually had the best game, then why not use the same criteria for POTY award? Does awarding a POTY award to a "local boy does good" seem silly to you? Then perhaps it is starting to sink in why many of us think that awarding a POTW award to a "local boy does good" while ignoring a much more dominating individual performance, is silly.

...it isn't such a stretch, never said it was, just pointed out that you made that leap of logic...in hindsight, maybe it's not a bad idea after all...actually, its a good idea....thanks for making it up...

I can see it now. With RW as CFL Commissioner, the Player of the Year awards would be awarded to the players who played football at the least known Colleges, regardless of how they performed during the season. Nothing bush league about that at all. I apologize for questioning your logic, RW. Although, I think you may be confusing how a "professional" sports league should choose their POTW's, with those cutesy news stories where they highlight a local amateur "athelete of the week", and give them a cool looking hat with the stations logo on it. If a Calgary sports station wants to give Cote one of those cute looking hats for "gettin it done" with 23 yards of offense, that would seem more appropriate.

By the way, when you repeatedly suggest that talking about the POTY awards was a "twist that wasn't there", that's pretty much saying that it was a stretch. I'm sure you can figure this one out.

...no apology necessary...but remember, when I am commisioner it's not actually the POTW that would be selected in this manner, just the Canadian one, the O/D/&ST POTW would still be based on pure athletic talent, just thought I should be clear on that seeing how you hadn't figured that out....

Hey red&white, this post was actually good for something afterall, larry has actually managed to reply without reminding us of the, you know what stat, :roll:

Oh please, RW, allow me to lift the scales from your eyes, and remove your confusion. I was completely aware that you were referring only to award the Canadian Player of the Week to a player playing for his home town team, that did not play University ball, and therefore did not have the football training or experience that some of his competition has. Such as J.R. Larose in Edmonton. Just ignore which Canadian actually had the best game, and award it to the best "feel good" story. I completely understand where you are coming from. Which is why I know it is so silly. If a "feel good" Canadian has a 23 yard game, and a local TV crew wants to honour him with their cute little hat for playing like such a big boy with all these great football players around him, and being their "unsung hero" as I said, I think that would be cute. For a "professional" sports league to hand out awards for such things, while overlooking much more dominating individual performances, is just silly.

A "professional" sports league that is always trying to convince people that the Canadian football talent pool is deep, this award is insulting to Canadian football players. The criteria for Canadian POTW should be no different than the Offensive, Defensive, or SP POTW. That is, award it to the Canadian player who had the most dominating performance that week. IF, that is, they want to highlight the Canadian talent we have in this league as having earned their positions, and are not charity cases. If the CFL wants to add a "feel good" POTW, then fine. But remove nationality out of it. It could go to an American that overcame cancer, some kind of serious injury, or a death in the family, to play a good game one week, and then go to a Canadian boy playing for his home town team, that racks up 23 yards from the line of scrimmage the next week. I think it would be a bit bush league, but it at least wouldn't diminish the honour of winning the Canadian POTW, and would keep it's honour on the same level as the other POTW awards.