Leaderboard

Win or lose I just want the game to be entertaining. Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely want to win and an ugly win is infinitely better than a pretty loss. With that said, there's been no sense of excitement while watching the team play this last little while and I just want to come away thinking: this was a fun night.

I very much care how it looks. Scrapping by against Ottawa with all their cuts and roster changes isn't much better than a loss. I expect our defence to hold them relatively in check (knowing that we give up a lot of yards), but I hope our offence can show some real progress in the red zone, which has been our biggest problem this year, imo.

I want them to play like a goddamn football team.

As always, just find a way to win. I don't care how it looks... I just want two points. Raining in town today, but hoping it lets up enough for game time. Let's go Blue!!

I dont want a just find a way..however ugly it looks win..thats just more lipstick on a pig and confirmation.. as false as it is to Osh that his method and decisions are the right ones I want to see decisive..played fast and mad..and prepared and confident from out of the gate. No having to go into halftime trying to figure out wtf just happened..but come out of halftime and put the finishing touches on the game Then I may have a lil optimism for the back half of the season..

Everyone is taking turns looking awful. So far the big difference is Davis Alexander being so great he can overcome Montreal's bad D and terrible special teams. The league is wide open. I'd say basically anyone but Hamilton and Ottawa could win it all.

That's true, but to be fair, we used to dress more DL. We've always built rosters in strange ways. It's important to remember that with the CFL roster rules and the reality of NI talent depth, you are going to be carrying suboptimal guys. And once injuries hit, it will get worse. That makes it all the more important to build and develop rosters intelligently. Some things you need in terms of backups on a CFL roster, A db who is a man cover guy, a couple dbs who can cover a zone, a couple big bodies for the trenches, dl and ol who can go the other way, one or two wrs who can run and catch, one or two guys who can play rb, teamers, back up holder/snapper/ and emergency kicker/punter. In the modern era, you really need a backup DI and ni/g run stopper/pass rusher who is effective. When you have 24 starters and 44/45 players on the AR, you should be able to cover those needs. The problem starts with DI usage. You basically need a DI DL (which we neglected many times since 21), and a DI DB. Really, a DI wr as well. But we carry a DI KR and DI K. We are married to that and have been for a long time. We are also married to carrying a DI Lber for team play. Combine that with the fact that we refuse to declare a naturalized import, and we are left trying to plug Canadians into positions where you would use a DI. And the problem worsens when our scouting has been worse than hit or miss, and development of talent even worse. We don't have the ability to roster our basic needs, and little flexibility to afford luxuries that would help us out a lot. But we spend roster allotment on luxuries, like we still have the 21 team in the locker room.

Vanterpool should be on the active roster. At the very least our 7th OL. Let him sub in for Bryant when he struggles or is tired. Vanterpool should be our RT & Broxton our LT. Nothing ever changes with Osh, though.

Looking at the schedule, this is our best chance for a win for the rest of the season and it pains me to even type that.

We'll have to put who some people think Tui Eli is in the Ring of Honour.

How many times did Streveler need to go in and play reciever? Way too many for those who didn't keep track.

Know what I would do? Drop elsbury, start Eli at C and have vanterpool as the 6th OL. No need for a 7th ok. Just use the pieces you have properly.

It would be nice to see the defence generate some big plays and turnovers, especially at home

I Want to see decent play design/call, physical play, competent execution and 4 full quarters of effort.

Ottawa has had a ton of roster turnover and they are on the 2nd longest losing streak in modern CFL history - this is, by far, our most winnable game so if we can't beat the RedBlacks, I have zero hope for the rest of the season. They need to show something now because the schedule is much tougher from here on out.

considering we wasted a DA spot on Hazen a few games agowhere he didnt ven have to tie his shoes up...that would make more sense, and he would at least get used in jumbo/short yardage...also Nationilze Bryant and run some sets with him at left guard and Vpool or Broxton at left tackle...and see how that works..best way to see is under live fire....but that would make too much sense But we you have created a shallow roster...and have limited usefulness with who you have on it...and especially the PR (OURS IS HORRID) you have to find ways to maximize what you have...we have too many plugs who serve no real purpose...cause anyone can play teams....so stock the backend with guys who have some potential for rotation or be a legit backup yeah...nailed it...our roster makeu is the worst in the league...and who/how we choose our DA's and backups is baffing...and doesnt appear to have any rhyme or reason....other than just guys Osh likes And as i said before...high potential guys who cant cut the starting lineup....yet...or who actually can push an incumbant should be the back half....and play teams, all the while get some important reps here and there....not a plethora of guys who can play teams only...but you dont want on offence or defence...thats just insane...A high potential guy can play teams juyst as ell...if not better than these guys that just have good teams film....just dumb...and hence why our depth is worst in league...and its not even close

Professional football players don't use training camp to get in shape for the season like they did 50-60 years ago. They work out & train all year round. Going four practices this week should have been easy for them this time of year. There was no reason to give the team that day off.

7th ol vs a te who can’t run or block, but also with other back up blockers. You need some extremely versatile guys who create opportunities to carry specialists with low use. a starter who kills it on teams, or a guy who can rotate at many spots and back up all over the roster. Also finding canadians who are very good specialists or versatile is huge. We don’t have much of that any more.

I don't know, I think it was so bad when Wallace had to play RT, I'd rather have Vanterpool dressed and doing nothing rather than an LB like Hazen who probably won't do much other than special teams which they have plenty of already... Do we need Ayers, Hazen and Woodbey...?

Honestly we used to dress 7 ol and I hated it. Was a waste of a roster spot. Like what purpose does that extra ol serve other than in case of injury? But if you lose 2 ol in a game you're probably hooped anyway.

Schmekel is the emergency OL and 7th OL. Plus Daniels. The quantity of blockers isn't an issue. Quality, on the other hand, is.

Seems to be pretty windy here at Fort Hew. Good thing the Bombers havent thrown for more than 10 yards as of late.

I think its simplifying as much as anything. Getting back to what the pieces we have are good at, rather than trying to dictate a philosophy that has shown it wont work here. That goes for both O and D too.

They could easily sub out Hazen for Singer and start Singer over Cobb without making any other changes since they are currently starting an extra Canadian.

Honestly, our identity is that of a has-been that stuck around at the party long after it ended and won't go home. It's a soft, old team that doesn't execute, bring effort, or do anything particularly well. The remaining schedule will do us no favours. 6 of the 9 games after today are against the top 3 teams in the league. Then Calgary and bc, who both handily beat us at home this year, along with Toronto rounding out the last 3. Plus, we are only 1 game up on Hamilton for 2nd-to-last in the league. Every one is neck and neck outside of ott and mtl, but I dont think any one else in the middle with us has a schedule near as hard as us.

I hear size doesn't matter.

Think the Bombers had the most rookie starters in the league before Ottawa blew up their roster the past 3-4 weeks. Think it's more who they are than not being young enough.

Elsbury did play a bit on college too...so it wouldnt be foreign to him...and if we arent or hadnt gave him reps there at all in camp/practice thats also pretty short sighted Only real talk of him I recall is Osh fascinated by the size of his legs...guess that sealed the deal and a starter he was lol We should teach Scmeck how to snap...He be probably a real tencious s.o.b as a center...He's built for it yeah...make more sense than having Hazen on yeah...If you are sacrificing a playmaker on offence...or a difference maker on defence for a 3rd import olineman...he needs to be a perenial all star...not a average at best guy

Back in the day you had your Front Four who played nearly every down for 16 games. They even gave defensive lines names like Capital Punishment in Ottawa, the Four Trees in Calgary & Alberta Crude in Edmonton. The units as a whole played pretty well using minimal subs. Now today ,we use subs to keep the DL fresh. Okay, I get that but why do we need to sub in 3 extra players when one extra player would suffice? If Jefferson or Reece get tired & want out for a couple of plays then you just work it around that. The sub actually gets to play a lot instead of wholesale changes on the line with 3 in the game. Football on the LOS hasn't changed in 60 years. It's still tough, nasty & physical in the pit. The guys in the 60's & 70's went thru the same thing the players today do during a game.The starters played 90% of the plays & they stayed in there. Yet, here we are taking our starters out for 3 subs. Maybe I'm out to lunch on this but I don't understand the need for 7 DL in a game. Only 1 on the OL with both a 40 & a 37 year old starters. Our OL is freaking ancient.

2000, late-season (week 15?) loss to the Als. After a tough start to the year for Ritchie's squad, we had turned the corner and were scraping for a playoff spot. In Montreal, we played a hard-nosed game and narrowly lost to an excellent team. That signaled the end of the dark ages and the far brighter future's arrival. We played the Als real hard that whole year, and most of our losses were by less than 1 TD. We won 7 games that year, and for my money, that season was better than many of the good teams we had in the 90s. Id be thrilled if they just answered the tone of the RBs physically from start to finish. But the fact we can't make plays on the ball, when the dbs are on a cushion watching the qb and we lead the league in sacks, is a really bad sign.

Gonna take KW to get off his ass and find one.

At this point, they just need a home win. Although I agree a close one won't be encouraging.

agreed...and it worries me a but cause the guys still in Ottawa from the outset have seen no job is safe...and will be playing with a purpose...like to save their job and you can bet as a whole thy will be coming out prepared and fired up...no complacency there or willingness to just settle for whatever Here... quite the opposite....My hope is a defining win... But based on leadup...no sense of urgency...no desire to change anything I expect 1 of 2 things...We either eeeck out a win in non convincing fashion to just justify what we doing(and that wouldnt be a good thing)...Or we get embarrassed and exposed again...much like previous games Coming off being embarrassed last game(s) our pathetic record at home and needing to show the fans we care...having a bye week so should be well rested and prepared, and having some starters back in lineup...no reason that we shouldnt lay a whoopin on a winless team...with a ton of recent turnover and safe to say more issues than we have Anything other than that is a sign we are playing a lost season and its not even labour day

To my wildly untrained eye, I thought Vanterpool did enough to justify staying on the roster and moving Brox over to LT...

The big advantage with ZC in there, is that he and Condell worked on this playbook all season to match Zac's strengths and preferences. That should give it a bump.

No hate from me either. Luv ya Booch. I just like to pluck feathers just like you do. Its the wild west commentary wise is why.

No we don't need that many linebackers either. Our receiver depth is both lacklustre and paper thin.

When it comes to the roster, every week I read it and its like:

It's getting to the point with thesse crazy roster decisions that I'd like to see the worst case scenario happen... call it the nuclear option... that our roster gets destroyed by the stupidity of Osh & his coaches. Just to teach these idiots a lesson. I have no ideas WTF they are doing. It's certainly not to give us the best roster to win.

These ad hominem attacks are dominating the forum and add little or nothing to the discussion. I hate to think what it will be like should the Bombers lose to Ottawa tomorrow. Lighten up, folks.

I was debating the jacket when I left the house... Made the right call. She's gonna be a chilly one tonight.

One of the biggest differences is the size, athleticism, and talent of opposing Ts and OL in general. Back in those days, even back not that long ago, OL were canadian ham n egger types. Now we have guys like Tyler Elsbury. He's faster than a handful of our skill position players, 6'6 and 333lbs. Our 2nd-best T (imo) is Hunter, who is 6'8 330 jumps a 30" vert, can put up 30 reps, and jumps almost 9 feet broad. The average DL is getting smaller in the CFL. We see far more 235- 249 lb DEs, and a lot more tweeners 275 and under who play DT and edge. Even if you are a bigger DE, say 265-270 and not playing inside, you are giving up an insane amount of weight to the T every single snap. Playing inside is even rougher, as you are likely to be hit by multiple OL. DL has gotten more athletic as well, but premium big athletes seldom go to DT over OT these days. OT is a vacuum at all levels, sucking up the best and biggest players teams can find. The gap, though, has gone from a size vs. athleticism battle on the edge to DL having to punch up in weight. The evolution of sports training has guys focused much more on explosive quickness and 10-yard splits rather than basic cardio-style run-jump stuff. And those fast-twitch muscles need more rest, and so does the whole athlete who is fighting an uphill battle. A tired DE, might be at 50%. But a rusher under 90% is likely to get his butt whupped unless he is elite. Another harsh reality of life in the CFL is that we don't get the polished players we used to. We seldom see pass rushers come up with more than a raw skill set and maybe 1 decent move anymore. The easiest way to succeed on the DL and create disruption is to cycle through guys quickly and keep them running as hard as they can, subbing them to keep them fresh. The longer your recovery system is in stay-fresh mode and not in heavy recovery mode, the better as well. If you are tired in the first quarter, you will not recover to 100%. You will peak lower, and each time you tire, the cycle will repeat. The OL also has the tremendous advantage of knowing what they will be doing before the snap and being able to dictate the play. Having to react and try to stop what you don't know demands a great deal of athleticism to overcome. As well as other factors, it is a great drain on athleticism. Speed is a butt saver as much as anything on D. Actively subbing high-wear positions is spreading like wildfire across football. It isn't just DL; it's RBs and more sharing the load. OL, WR, and DB are really the outliers in this area. WR and DB are paired in being less physically demanding and being tuned more for marathon-type activity. Ol, is so thin across all levels of football that the drop-off after the 5th guy is far too steep.

I would've kept Randolph... said to Big Stan "hey goat, you're 40 now so it's safe to assume you always have a back issue. How does 6-game/assistant OL coach sound?"... then worked Wallace or Neuf at C... started a line of Broxton-Vanterpool-Neufeld-Wallace-Randolph.... if you're gonna have a 3-american OL... they need to be dominant... I don't know if my proposed group is "dominant"... but I have a hard time believing it's worse than what we've seen

really...record be damned...if we lose this game with all things considered...bye week...etc...we def have to be considered the worst in the league Sure we have more wins than Ott...but we barely beat them last time...and the Ham win...The last drive CGY win where we collapsed and they didnt have their full squad....and the aforementioned Ott win we lucky as it is to be 4-4 and not 1-7

It would be nice to have a sense of what this team's identity is.

Np, the media is more complacent than the mafia is. They packed in the hard questions and such before we won in 19. OL is always a gamble when it comes to how many guys you put on the AR. Every year, every team will gamble many times. The only way you can create a non-gambling situation is with a ratio-breaking Canadian, or great depth and versatility. I will say, when you are struggling to protect the QB, it is best to gamble on wasting a spot than it is to risk being short on the OL. I look at our WR core and can not imagine us doing worse with 1 more ol and 1 less wr. Which could be an import even. IMO, Poncius is our 2nd best option at T. Then Vanterpool as the 3rd best, very close to Elsbury sliding over. Elsbury has the tangibles to play outside, and none of the intangibles or the power to play inside well enough. Maybe he can develop, but without power, I don't think he has the upside you need in a starting Imp interior ol. Between Elsbury and Eli we have 1 C that fits our needs. Id put Wallace at RT above Bryant. At least he can battle and get his hands on guys. Yes, in the run game. This year and last year, albeit in very limited volume. He's physical as hell and has a great edge to him. Agree. Rando could become an excellent RT. He isn't where you want him to be right now, but he is a good improvement with a chance to be great. I think he is plug and play great inside though. Teach him to snap the ball and replace Elsbury.

I've never seen a pretty loss, and I've been watching football all my life. A win would mean we're not the worst team in the league. A loss means we may be just that.

Brady with an ankle injury makes him an GTD, hopefully he plays, the Bombers even with ZC need all the help they can get against a team they had problems with in Ottawa.

We have just one OL (Eli) listed as backup. If anyone goes down we are truly ******. But we dressed 100 linebackers & 35 DL. WTF is with our roster??? Every bloody game we have this ****.