Sambo, you can't make a free agent sign a contract. Burris ran to the money not once, but twice. But none of that changes the facts here. People constantly say that Roy Shivers and Danny Barret were tied to Nealon Greene like he was an anchor. First of all, Nealon played very very well for us in 2002 and 2003. His 2003 numbers are only marginally below those of KJ's MOP year last year. But he only started for just slightly over 2 years out of 7. And we had 4 other starters. That in no way translates into a "stuck with Nealon too long" scenario. He played great for 2 years. He actually started 2005 very strong--runner up player of the week and player of the week as we went 3-1 to start the year. As soon as he played poorly, he was replaced. And then as down the stretch that year, it became clear Marcus was not the guy either, we went after KJ. When exactly was this period of time when we stood pat at QB during the Shiver's era? When did they ever accept mediocre play? Never happened. That is my point.
Accept or criticize the Bishop deal on its own merits. But making up stuff about the past to make this deal seem better, tends to make me more suspicious of it, not less. If the Bishop deal is so fine, then one should be able to defend it without resorting to subterfuge...
One of the most entertaining aspects of this whole thing, for me at least, has been the almost overwhelming response by Rider Nation of "let's toss Marcus under the bus" as if all along everyone of them always said Marcus was no good. When in reality, there was an eerie acquiescence among Rider fans before the season that as long as ET said it was right, then it must be so. Very few fans ever spoke out in any critical way about that decision. Suddenly, after this episode, you'd think they all were pounding their fists in outrage over Marcus being the starter from day one!
A lot of hypocrisy going on here, methinks!
Say what you like about ET,but he did make the right call letting the premadonna Joseph go.
He should have just traded Joseph for Bishop
Jm, if this thread was not specifically started as an assault upon Roy Shivers, explain the title to me? And the opening post?
If you don’t like Roy, terrific. That is your perogative. But to salute ET’s latest move as a good one, but dismiss the nearly identical move made by Roy in 2002 as though it never happened, seems a little more unreasonable than you usually are. We can only hope that this Bishop move is as successful as trading for Nealon was…in fact, it only needs to be about half as good to be okay!
And I will never ever understand bizarre comments like that one…
I disagree on the hypocrisy thing, mainly because many Rider fans were willing to give Crandell a chance. He did play well before he was injured, but he was not the same player after he came back.
I don't really know is Bishop is the answer, maybe he is or maybe he isnt the right QB for the Riders right now. As much as the receivers did not help Marcus, he did not help his own cause by trying to do more than what he is capable of.
I wasn’t speaking about you directly regarding Shivers…I was speaking in general terms, as this whole “Shivers” thing has been beaten to death…consider it a comment on the thread, please…
You think I’m being unreasonable? Good for you…your choice…I’m confident in my opinions, and I applaud the move from a “send a message” point of view, not from a personal point of view.
Pssttt…I don’t fault Shivers for all his moves here, for the record - I never liked Greene either, and him being traded away was the best b-day present a Rider fan could ever ask for…
Again, the "unreasonable "part of your argument was when you said you liked what ET did, and lamented that we had not seen a GM do something like this in years when the very guy ET replaced actually did pretty much exactly the same thing–a couple of times and only 6 months before ET was hired in fact. They were not identical situations, but pretty close…if you credit one guy, but not the other, that seems unreasonble.
As for the thread, I absolutely agree with you that this has been beaten to death so many times in the past as to become boring. But then you could just lock it, or torch it. Not that I am recommending that.
But frankly, from where I sit, if people want to continue to disregard the facts, and to make stuff up, I will continue to try to set the record straight.
Roy had plenty of character flaws. I wonder why people only ever talk about the make believe ones?
I don't see the situations as being the same at all - similarities, yes, but not the same...Shivers pulling a move with similar vibes happened in the off-season, not mid-season, which is why I stated (not lamented, thanks, but please avoid the loaded words when trying to dissect my phrasings) that I was in favour of the move...not a big deal, really...
I do recognize the situations are not the same–no two such situations are likely to ever be identical. But the purpose of both moves was very nearly identical–and Marcus Crandell was victim of both. The current starter, Marcus Crandell was deemed not good enough, so a replacement was sought. The differences, as I see them, do not favour the ET move. The mid-season, throw Marcus under the bus, aspect of this I find very repugnant. And possibly very disruptive. A lot of people see it as a positive move–a message as it were. Well that message comes across loud and clear if you bench Marcus and play Jyles Sunday. The wrong message is sent by releasing him. Plus you have definately made signing Durant more difficult. And trading for KJ was getting a bonafide starter, rather than a “never was” career back-up. And even with Nealon, who was a back-up at the time, you got a guy who was young and his whole career was ahead of him. If Marcus is too old, if KJ is too old, then Bishop is what? A spring chicken? No, this is “last chance” territory for him. He succeeds here, or he will be out of football by this time next year. So I believe the whole mid-season aspect of this is part of the reason I do not like it. If you had a chance to get Ricky Ray, or Calvillo, or Glenn–maybe. But to make a move like this–getting one career back=up to replace the last career back-up after he fails makes little sense to me. This was not an upgrade, but rather a lateral move. Next guy on the list has to be Marcus Brady…
With your "Crandell was the victim" comments, are you intending to imply that Crandell was an appropriate quarterback for the Riders and should have been kept as the number one quarterback instead of Bishop? Such is the life of sports...scapegoats abound on sports teams, and no one can logically argue that Crandell did not perform to expectations, regardless of the Riders' record right now.
I will just chalk your comments thus far up to "ET doesn't know how to run a football team" and walk away from the discussion, since it serves no purpose...
Crandell was “the victim” in the sense that in both cases (thereby dispelling the notion this is anti-ET) it was Marcus Crandell who lost his job as starter. My opinion of Marcus Crandell is well documented. I do not believe he was ever a good QB, not even in the “glory year” in Calgary. But he has done more in his career than Bishop. So no, I don’t believe he should have remained the starter. I don’t know that he should ever have been the starter. But I had no problem with keeping Marcus around as a solid back-up and he is supposedly a leader in the locker room (something the jury is certainly out on in regards to Bishop, who from the outside at least, appears to have been a whiner the last few years–maybe he was just unfairly treated.) if this could have been justified as a SMS decision, that might have been understandable. If he was to be relegated to back-up status, maybe you release him to save cap space. But by bringing in Bishop, ET has clearly said that was not a factor in the decision, as both guys likely have similar numbers. Bishop may actually be the higher paid guy.
And no, I do not like the way Marcus was treated–for all of the reasons I have said. Everyone gets on the its a business" bandwagon. Well even in business, you treat people with respect. There was no respect shown Marcus here, as there was no reason to make this deal.
Let's focus less on why we hate Roy Shivers, and more on why Al Ford was a colossal failure as a GM.
Give Shivers credit. He built up a pretty solid core of players who are still key members of the organization.
Whereas Al Ford kept players who were well beyond their best-before date, and stuck around himself well past his own date too.
He should have stepped aside in '92.
Pretty sure ET brought Joseph to the CFL.
Pretty sure Shivers has 0 rings as a gm.
Pretty sure ET has 3 as a gm.
Pretty sure Shivers had 7 years with the Riders. 0 home playoff games. 0 championships. 0 coach of the year winners.
Pretty sure Riders got home playoff game ETs 1st year. Won cup and Austin coach of year.
Pretty sure Riders got better in ETs 1st year.
Pretty sure Riders with more injuries than Lions are 6 and 2. Lot more injuries.
Pretty sure Lions are 4 and 5 in Shivers 1st year.
Pretty sure Arius loves Shivers so much he cant help it. Any time someone gives Tillman credit. Arius brings Shivers into the fight.
Pretty sure most can see what Arius does. And why.
Pretty sure most can compare 7 years and 2 years. See the difference.
Pretty sure if Miller and ET had kept Crandall this is what Arius would say. To stubburn to admit they were wrong.
Pretty sure Joseph played better for Austin than for Barrett. Better for Austin than for Stubler. Who hired Austin?
Pretty sure Arius doesnt want me to say this again. 0 home playoffs in 7 years. 0 championships in 7 years.
Pretty sure most will say Shivers made Riders better. Pretty sure most will say Tillman has made Riders a lot better.
ETs own creation? Who screwed up the cap Arius?
Bag. Hammers. Austin, hammers.
Not as smart. Arius. As he thinks. Returns.
Why does this always happen. When you are asked a question Arius you attack the person asking the question.
Some simple questions Arius.
Who screwed up the cap?
Did the Riders finish 1st or 2nd 1 time under Shivers?
Shivers was gm in Birmingham and Saskatchewan. 9 years total I think. Did any of those teams win Grey Cup? Get to Grey Cup?
Did Austin and Tillman win cup in 1st year?
Do the Riders have the best record in the CFL?
Please answer Arius. Not attacks. Just answer the questions.
My last comment was too much, so I apologize, I blame a few too many wee drams of scotch for that.
But you certainly don’t shy away from attacks, Austin.
I’ve given plenty of credit to Austin and ET for their roles in winning the Grey Cup last year. It is a shame you are incapable of giving Roy and Danny the credit they deserve for building this franchise back up to a point where we were positioned to win.
Roy Shivers pulled this franchise out of the gutter when Eric Tillman couldn’t be bothered to take the job.
Shivers made the team better. No argument. Not from any person who is fair. Shivers did a lot of good things. But 7 years was enough. That is fair to. But your last Tillman comment is typical of Arius. You always twist truth with ET. The man has said this many times. He wanted to take the Riders job. Was dating a woman in Toronto he loved. He stayed in Toronto and married her. Have you seen his little kids at practice? Or at the game? Have you seen his wife? That is very different from you post. Very typical of how you twist what ET has done. He turned down the job to start a family. Is that ok?
I think it is sweet that ET chose the girl over the job. Don’t really care beyond that. Fact is, this team was a disaster in 1999, bankrupt both on the field and off and Roy Shivers was the guy who did take the job and who did drag this franchise back to respectability and who did make us perennial contenders for the first time in a generation. And whether you like it or not, he deserves as much credit for the championship and ongoing success of this franchise as does ET. Without the work Roy Shivers did in his term, ET never wins a championship in his first year. Period!
Just wondering, Austin…do you laud Al Ford for his term as GM in the same manner as you do ET? The team also won a Grey Cup in his first year. Or do you perhaps, as do I, actually give most of the credit to Bill Baker?
And I have never voiced any objection to terminating Roy and Danny after 7 years. That is just your delusion. I have voiced disapproval of the manner in which Roy was dismissed. That showed an utter lack of class from Jim Hopson and the organization. But I personally felt DB should have been released after 2005. Even after 2004 I questioned his role with the team, but cut him some slack because Nealon had been injured that year. And ultimately, if Roy was unwilling to fire DB, then he needed to go as well. And the simple reality was, Hopson and Roy were never going to be able to work together. Hopson is a big fat idiot and Roy is far to stubborn and cocky and even arrogant to ever work with a guy like that. So it was inevitable that Roy would be fired--regardless of whether the team was successful on the field.