Shivers/Lions/last place-Coincidence? not

So I remember when Roy never drafted Clermont, he said Cdn talent wasn't important. He treated Farthing with disrespect yet demanded it himself. Hmmm, so where has BC gone the past few years? Meanwhile, look at those Cdn boys go for the Riders. Go Ti Cats...

Shivers was totally overrated!

he truly did very little for this team. no home playoff games, no Western Finals, no Grey Cups!

poor Canadian talent, bad people in the dressing room, terrible community relations..

Not a big Shivers fan but he and Barrett brought the Riders to a point where Tillman just had to fill a few holes. They brought respectability back to the organization on a playing level. Gotta give the guy his due. He had failings but he also laid a solid foundation.

Yeah, I'm going to disagree with this, Shivers built a solid foundation by rebuilding this team from it's 3-15 years and millions in debt. Love or hate the guy, he is a key reason why the Riders are who they are today, and even E.T. has said this. And believe me, I am NOT a Shiver's fan, I thought he was a reverse racist ("Good young Black quarterback" comments), and had nothing but himself to worry about. But he could source talent and had an eye for it.

But Shivers only got us to the same point we were at in the early 90's.. 9-9.. losing in the 1st rd.

He brought in some talent, but he failed in two places, that were HUGE keys.



Canadian Talent.

Remember folks.. he was the one who was all "Nealon Greene!! he's our Man if he can't do it, no one can!"

He let guys like Kevin Glenn and Henry Burris go! to keep Nealon...

jee, where's Greene lately?? and wait.. isn't that Glenn in Hamilton?? and Burris in Calgary? BUT I thought they weren't good enough to play here!!??


Shivers.. :roll:

I agree - mediocrity was his middle name, but Nealon vs Burris? That wasn’t the way I remember 03-05. In 2003 we went 11-7, 16 games as Nealon was the starter (he goes 10-6). 2004, Game 1 Nealon breaks his leg, Burris takes it the rest of the season for 9-9. At the end of 2004 Burris is ticked about money, Shivers didn’t cough up (insert debate either way here), and Burris bolts to Calgary. So Burris left and Nealon simply got the job back. But of course the hindsight was that yes, in 2005, it was getting windy at Taylor field because Nealon was sucking and blowing at the same time, getting yanked half way through.

Kevin Glenn? No arguments here, I don’t think he was ever given the real chance to develop here.

We had Kevin Glenn, Nealon Green and Henry Burris. I personally would have kept Nealon and Kevin. But we were only going to keep two and Kevin asked to be traded if he was just going to be 3rd string. RS actually did try to trade Burris---just seeing what he could get I think. But it certainly had nothing to do with whether they were good enough.
And then after 2004, Burris left. We really had little choice. I have a fairly reliable source from inside the Stamps organization that says by the time the dust settled, Calgary offered Burris nearly 100 k more than we did. So we'd have had to cough up over 400 k to be competitive. I'd have let him walk at that price too. But the offer we made to Hank--nearly double what Nealon re-signed for at the same time--tells us Burris would have been the #1 guy.

And it is funny that Roy gets criticized because Kevin and Hank both left. Who found them in the first place?

Shivers had tonnes of faults. But he also brought our team up to respectability. When he started out we had nobody, our defence sucked our offence sucked.
He signed the players that made our defence Great.
He never brought us over the platteau but I think Barret had a lot to do with that. Without Shivers we don't win in 2007, and we are not where we are right now with 3 straight home games. Not a chance.

Shivers definetly had his faults (Canadian Talent being his glaring hole in my opinion) but to say

"he truly did very little for this team."

Is so wrong it isn't even funny.

Good point Arius, I think sometimes it’s easy to forget those types of things. I guess my comment was less about Shivers and more about Glenn, which using your statement provides proof that Roy had/has that eye for talent…undeniable.

American talent yes.. but he could have cared less about the Canadians.. as you can see.

don't want to nit pick... but I am going to anyways. The phrase you are looking for is "Couldn't have cared less" doesn't make any sense the other way.

Roy Shivers should have left after year #5.

Then, instead of him being run out of town on a Greyhound, we'd be saying what a fine GM Roy was.

And let's not get too far from reality in terms of Roy and Canadian talent. I'll grant that there is a greater focus now than there was then, but to his credit, Roy drafted Schultz, McCullough, Fantuz and Congi while he was here. McKoy too, who would probably be ok if he could just stay healthy. And Mullinder, although I don't know if he was a pick or a free agent.

I am all into this. The problem with Roy was that he stayed too long ... and who's fault is that? Certainly not Roy's. Just as I say with QBs or any other player, I am not a "fan" of A or B; rather, I am a fan of the team. So I am no "fan" of Roy ... or ET ... or even Preston, but clearly Roy impoved the team in the time he was here. Like boy scouts - leave the camp cleaner than when you arrived. It's just that when it was equally clear that when the team plateau'ed, it kept on trucking at a 9-9 level beyond its best before date.

Actually, McKoy was the first draft pick ET ever made for us…
Mullinder was a draft pick.
It is interesting how much flack Roy got over his “lack of concern for NI players”. Let’s dig deeper. A lot of it I believe, came because he never drafted Clermont. well that’s nice and all, but as we never had an opportunity to draft him… meanwhile ET passed on him twice. And the same guy who was on point for the Canadian draft, Alex Smith, still does the same job for ET. Go figure.
Geno, O-Day and Szarka were here when Roy got here, and of course remain. But here is an interesting tidbit. I just looked at our current 46 man roster. 25 imports, 21 NI. Of the imports, only 6 guys remain that Roy brought in (originally). All starters by the way. But of the 21 NIs, 10 are still guys that were here when roy was. Of the other 11, only 2 are draft picks made by ET, and after 3 full draft years, only Keith Shologan has cracked the starting line-up, and we had to trade our starting QB to get that pick. Meanwhile, in that same time, what do these guys have in common? Rolly Lumbala, Jason Arakgi, and Shea Emery. All guys chosen from draft picks we traded away. And I don’t believe we have much to show as yet for those trades. ET has made a few trades to pick up talent. Donavon Alexander has turned out nicely. If Leron Mitchel ever gets healthy, he should be good. We have some prospects that look good, but statistically, they won’t all pan out. Guys like Stadnyk, JSP , Hutchins, Rempel, and George. And most of those are current draft picks. But as yet, unproven. And I think we gave up players to get each of those guys. They weren’t free.
So overall, given our supposed emphasis on NIs under ET, and Roy’s nonchalant attitude, the gap in the results isn’t all that substantial—to date at least.

We were in the Western finals in 2006, and 2004 I believe (when McCallum missed the field goal that could have sent us to the Grey Cup and ended up with cow crap on his front lawn.)