Stop blaming theplayers

retired, injured, and not good enough

simply replying where they are.
i sort of disagree about donnelly i like is versatility and when robichaud had his appendix removed it would have been a good guy to have around or long snaps,eh?

tcfan wrote:
There isn't a team out there who would not want to get their hands on Lumsden ( the guy who when he is healthy we can't seem to get the ball to),

Wrong.

Yea you're right Sigpig. Who would want Lumsden. We should get rid of him. Heck why not give him to Toronto. Let's watch how the Argos take a Ticat reject and ride him all the way to the Grey Cup. Or maybe we could give him to Edmonton so he can play with all the other overachieving former Ticats. Hey even better, Why don't we trade the best running back in the league for a couple of no-names so we can cut them in training camp. Been there done that a few times over the last few years. Look where it has got us.

tcfan - my mistake. I meant to highlight the bracketed phrase. We certainly CAN get the ball to Jesse when he's healthy. It's the o-line's JOB to open holes for him and protect the QB.

Jesse is not the best back in the league.

he certainly isn’t playing with the Cats who don’t know what they have and don’t know how to use it…

I would bet there is a few teams who would pass him over. Sask and Calgary would likely not bite as they have better backs who remain healthy. His trade value would be lower then you expect. Noone would ride him to the cup or pin their hopes on him the guy cant stay healthy. If he wasnt canadian i think the job would be Caulleys he is a much more well rounded and durable back

ADAWG wrote,

It doesnt come down to coaching it comes down the players last nite 2 huge errors were made by a player that gave up 14 quick points as well as a gimme on 3rd and 1. No matter who was coaching they couldnt have stopped that from happening. it comes down to lack of talent and players making horrible mistakes. Coaches can only coach a game its up to players to execute and they arent

ADAWG, we don`t have a lack of talent. Last night it was poor execution and careless mistakes that cost us.

i would also add bc to that list. they have 2 good baacks and tons of canadien talent.

I couldn't agree more. I stated in an earlier post, that time is probably running out on trading Jesse for someone of value who is more durable and who can play long term.

No matter where Jesse goes, he rides the pine or simply stays home. He is not helping this team unless you count his sporadic runs when he is actually able to play. WE need solid backs that can be depended on for an entire season. This will NEVER be Jesse!

He might actually be difficult to get rid of at this stage.

You can’t be serious. How can you adjust when your tackles and guards are consistenly getting beat one-on-one? You can’t teach talent.

A coaches job is to implement a blocking scheme. In this case the players are individually breaking down and there is no way to adjust to that aside from double teams. Watch the game film…when we double team, they are still getting pressure. Heck, other teams are getting pressure with a three-man rush. With no coaching at all, five O-linemen and a RB should be able to stop three guys, but it’s not happening!

Funny, you also learn in “coaching 101” that every rookie you start will account for approximately one loss during the regular season. We have roughly seven or eight rookies starting every game. (Some times more, some times less.) Factor in regular loses against teams equally as good or better and you have a 10-loss + season which is what we’re heading to. It doesn’t really surprise me.

I think the coaches are getting a solid effort out of their young roster and aside from the mistakes, the heart and determination is there.

I’m not going to debate your last point because I agree. Offensively, we can be a little more creative and run some blitz busting packages like the screen. However, our receivers have to come back to the ball also and that is only partially coachable…the player has to have the brains to read the D and know when he has to run the hot route.

Game 1: Montreal @ Hamilton: we started 6 rookies.

game 2: Hamilton @ Toronto: we started 5 rookies.

game 3: Saskatchewan @ Hamilton: we started 5 rookies.

game 4: Hamilton @ Calgary: we started 5 rookies.

game 5: Edmonton @ Hamilton: we started 4 rookies.

game 6: Hamilton @ Montreal: we started 6 rookies.

game 7: Toronto @ Hamilton: we started 6 rookies.

game 8: Hamilton @ Winnipeg: we started 5 rookies.

7 or 8 rookies starting and sometimes more? we never had more than 6.

and in each of those i counted Chris Thompson who was with edmonton for 2 years but never got to see any game time (if i am wrong there then take away 1 rookie from each game)

All I will say about this is that I am starting to feel bad for players like Williams,Zeke, and many more who come into each game playing hard but this brass always seems so confused and never gets it right!What can you do about that? Nothing?Thats even more frustrating being helpless!

Ummm, yes I consider Thompson a rookie. Does it not go by games played as opposed to seasons on a roster?

I consider Adams, Lewis, Mitchell, Rodriguez, Cohen, Rempel, Cavka, Pavlovic, Kordic, Manning, Tisdale, Davis, Bekasiak and Smith all rookies as well. That gives us 15 inlcuding Thompson, and most of them have actually started at least one game with the exception of Kordic.

Technically, I'm not sure how many games you have to play before you're not considered a rookie anymore, but half of our team has less than 15-20 games of CFL experience.

At any rate, I was throwing that number out there, but replacing one of our rookies with another rookie that's even more green makes my case even stronger.

Combine that with the new faces of Knowlton, Robinson, Patrick....etc. and we have a complete overhaul from last season and it's going to take some time to click. (And guess what, we are starting to.)

rempel,pavlovic,manning,bekasiak,davis haven't started. Cavka was with us last season.

and you can't blame anything on "new faces"

Calgary and Edmonton each have about 20 new players.

Rempel has played an awful lot lately. Pavlovic might not be the starter, but he has played a significant amount in every game, especially in that TE format. Manning might as well have started two games by now, because he has played almost two full games due to early injuries.

Cavka played five games last year....does that make him a veteran? He's a rookie.

Calgary and Edmonton had a solid base to build on when you look at their rosters from the last few seasons. On the other hand, we had 7 wins in two years coming into this season. You tell me who which team would be able to adapt quicker?

BTW, our coaching staff is pretty much brand new as well with the exception of Charlie. That counts for something.

You are the one laying blame....not me. I'm defending our coaching staff and people like you are blaming them for everything.

Collectively, there are may reasons we are losing aside from our coaching staff but for some people, they can't decipher their arse from their elbow. I'm not saying it isn't the the coaching at all, but there is more to the story. Read between the lines.

Agreed and it's not fair to the coaches to think that they can't learn and improve just as players and a team unit do.

They're part and parcel of any team unit and this is a very new unit that needs time to find their identity.

You can't be serious. How can you adjust when your tackles and guards are consistenly getting beat one-on-one? You can't teach talent.
Of course I'm serious. You think every other team has 5 studs on the OL.

They are not constantly getting beat. They get beat (sometimes badly) trying to pass protect.

So you run more, you use a tight more, you use 2 backs more, you go to quick hitters more, you roll out more, you sweep more, you stay the heck out of the pocket more.

Funny, you also learn in "coaching 101" that every rookie you start will account for approximately one loss during the regular season. We have roughly seven or eight rookies starting every game. (Some times more, some times less.) Factor in regular loses against teams equally as good or better and you have a 10-loss + season which is what we're heading to. It doesn't really surprise me.
Cute Quote, but mostly crap. This would only make any sense if you played in a league with no other team that had rookies. If every team loses 8 games because they have 8 rookies we would probably be 500 wouldn't we?

people keep saying "look how young this team is" and "this team is so inexperienced"

and its true....this team is young and inexperienced....but thats not why were losing.

i was doing some research and i came across somethign very interesting.

when i look at the Hamilton active roster is see....21 players that have less than 2 full years of cfl experience (meaning they came hear last year)

i also see 2 cfl all-stars from 2007.

4 Eastern division all-stars from 2007.

and our record stands at 2-6 this season.

now when i look at Calgary's active roster

i see....21 players with less than 2 full years of cfl experience (meaning the same as the 21 hamilton players)

so we are even in that department.

then i looked at Calgary's all-stars.

calgary has 0 CFL all-stars from 2007 (yes thats right....0)

Calgary has 4 Western Division all-stars from 2007

See i discovered that us and Calgary are quite similar.....except with our 2008 records

Calgary is 4-3 in a tougher division.....and we are 2-6...in a very very bad division

boy would i ever like to have John Hufnagel and his coaching staff.

Jordan:

Good research sir!