Saturday 2 July 2011

There Should Be No Quarterback Controversy

No burying the lead here: there is no QB controversy in Hamilton. Kevin Glenn is the starter, period.

I think people, especially reporters like the National Post's Mark Masters, are reading way too much into the comments made after the game by Ti-Cat Head Coach Marcel Bellefeuille and Quarterback Kevin Glenn.

Bellefeuille said that he was going to "look at the tape" before deciding who will start next week in Edmonton.

Glenn said that he "felt disrespected" and that getting pulled in the first game was "like a smack in the face."

Both men have points, but when Bellefeuille looks at the tape he will likely see some bad throws by Glenn, but also a lot of dropped passes by the Receivers. I can think of at least five that hit the turf that we very catchable.

Glenn had a very poor game, but in his defense, he is coming off an MOP-caliber season and should be given more leeway than what the coach gave him. Despite Glenn and the team's poor play, the Cats were still in the game until the very end. I don't agree with the decision to bench your starter in the first game. Bellefeuille should have allowed Glenn to work through it. What was the worst that could happen? The team lost anyway, so they wouldn't have been in any worse position had Glenn played the whole game.

Throwing Porter out there was not the best decision either, as it put him in a tough, near-no-win situation. On the whole, the decision from nearly every angle was the wrong one.

But when Hamilton takes the field in Edmonton next week, Glenn will be under Centre, no two ways about it. Glenn has earned the right to pilot this ship, and he will do so once again in a week's time against the Eskimos. Any talk of a QB controversy is just that: talk. It's media hype and nothing more.

Everyone needs to sit back and take a deep breath. This is a hiccup, not a heart attack, and everyone needs to react as such.


  1. Agree with most of that.

    However, I was not surprised Glenn got pulled and I don't disagree with that decision. But hindsight being 20/20, and seeing how Porter didn't rise to the challenge (evidence he's seeing the defense differently? not in that game), the team probably could have left him in there to deal with the mess.

    I just wish Glenn would have acknowledged his part in that mess. He can express "disrespect" if he chooses, but he also needs to own up to what he did wrong, just like one of his primary targets did and more receivers should have.

    Once they've had a chance to review what was wrong, I have little doubt everyone will be pulling together again and trying to work out the kinks. There are too many winning attitudes on the team now to do otherwise.

  2. Correct, in hindsight there was no need to put Porter in the game. I just think Glenn has earned the right to try to pull himself out of any funk. At the time, I didn't like the call because I didn't think it was necessary.

    But what's done is done, and it's time to move on and focus on the next game. I have to think the team will come out with a lot of fire in their bellies to prove Week 1 was an aberration.