Discussion in 'CFL League Talk' started by Rids, Jun 24, 2012.
I haven't verified this yet but believe it to be close if not completely right.
The reality is unless you have a championship calibre team, football coaches are always looking for players who are going to give them the most success. With a huge college and university feeder system along with non guaranteed contracts, players are very vulnerable to change.
Therefore, if a team has a losing record there will always be changes made. Rarely you see one player stay with the same team for their whole career.
The reality of pro football to me is an alloy of scouting, football management, non-football management & players.
The scouting & players (related) are very much subjective. The football management and non-football management are rigid by nature and tend to reproduce the same form chart, month after month, year after year.
All areas tend to slap each others back until internal frustration (based on losses or poor gates) sets in (denial of real problems, traditional excuses like injuries, poor scheduling, and that great 'ol bugaboo execution)
Once internal frustration spills over into social media, traditional media, etc. firings and trades begin as the team realizes its current direction cannot produce results at the gate or the box office.
Player shuffles and minor management executions are the first steps along with more denials - and finally when the GIG IS UP, sometimes taking years a GM and/or coach is purged from the squad and a rebuild ensues.
The rebuild enables new regimes of managment and/or coaching to begin the same process again - albeit from Square 1.
You're overlooking three factors there Bronko.
1. The supply outweighs the demand in a landslide.
2. Vets cost more than rookies and when the difference between the vet and the rookie is little or nothing the new player gets the spot.
3. Coaches aren't aligned with teams for decades, they are given a year at best to prove they can win and can't wait to rebuild. It's reload or look for work. No reason to stick with a roster that lost games under the thought that a long off season will somehow make them better prepared or just better players.
This is interesting but certainly not anything new. How many Stampeders are left from their 2008 Grey Cup team, for example? It isn't what you did for me yesterday that counts... but what have you done for me today that is important. Rids is right, coaches get paid to win, same with players. Winning at the CFL & NFL level is everything.
and now the back to back champion als have let go many of their players and coaches that helped them win. You gotta enjoy a championship when you can, then look forward to the 10-20-30 year reunions in the future.
Bombers situation is classic case your description - however, Bombers are probably guilty of over-thinking most of their final decisions, thinking their cuts are gonna latch on with any other CFL roster. (so far only Clik Clak (Kent) has latched on)
Plopko and Joe Lazy have some incredible athletes in town (so do most CFL teams) but the combination of nervous coaching and gaping holes on our o-line and MLB speaks for a long, long season. Plopko's charges get a bye for their first four games (lazy training camp, first four away) so they can be 1-3 or 0-4 and nobody in bomberville (other than the sick shills) will be surprised. However, if they hunt up 0=4 and then give bad gas off in their next two or three, the panic button is in cal murphy's antiquated left drawer.