WBBFanWest
-
Posts
3,169 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by WBBFanWest
-
-
11 hours ago, Goalie said:
The real reason you don’t see renovations on old stadiums is because the cost probably to renovate is close to the cost of a new modern smaller one.
let’s be real, you starting taking things down in old buildings and old homes for that matter, there’s gonna be **** behind the walls you don’t wanna see that doesn’t meet todays codes. It’s a mess once you start opening up walls in old homes and buildings. The asbestos removal costs alone would be millions. Sometimes it’s cheaper to knock it down and redo it so you don’t have to in 10 years. Putting lipstick on a pig makes the pig cuter but it’s still a pig.
And yet, there are tons of people in Saskatchewan who have no issue with that at all.
-
2 hours ago, Rich said:
Who would even get the money when a non profit is sold privately?
The article talks about how the club is in rough times financially, some due to the pandemic, some due to the record. Club success is cyclical and that should not be reason to sell the club.
The other they give is they need a new stadium. If we've learned anything over the last 20 years, private owners aren't typically willing to put down a lot of their own capital to build stadiums / arenas. Like it or not, this inevitably comes from the tax payer.
So why sell the club to a private owner to reap that potential benefit?
Don't like this one bit.
There would be by-laws in place that would lay out what would happen. In many cases, the money goes into some sort of charitable organization.
-
23 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:
In 1986, our three qbs were Tom Clements, John Hufnagel, Jim Zorn & on the PR Tom Muecke. I see Muecke was dressed & on the sidelines. Clements was out of the lineup with an injury so he was elevated to #3 qb position.
The game itself hasn't changed that much since 1986. I know Rich was talking about that if they went back 40 years from this game shown it would be 1946 but the same basic stuff is still going on. The equipment (helmets) are better & we have video replays. That fumble may have been overturned for a TD today if it touched the white end zone line. The game really changed from 1946-86 & not so much from 1986-2024.
I just remember being so pissed at Kehoe after that game. He had two jobs.... Find a hole & score & then PROTECT THE ******* BALL!!!!!!!
that's three things
-
6 minutes ago, Mark H. said:
What exactly is there to be gained from roasting Kelly on here? Trotting out harassment stats? It's not our problem to solve. And even if it were, we sure as cuss would not be doing it here.
It's in the description of the forum...
- Bigblue204, Noeller and bearpants
-
1
-
2
-
1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:
Please go ahead and explain it.
Which of these do you think applies?
She didn't quit with cause or fail to comply with a contract. The company didn't change the terms of employment or force her to quit.
If they had offered her a contract and she turned it down because of the situation, then she'd have a constructive dismissal situation, but that's not what happened. She's complaining that they didn't offer her a new contract. Why would she complain if the situation made her work environment untenable anyway? If they offered and she accepted, then she'd be accepting Kelly's behavior.
Nope. I had to learn, feel free to do the same and that's not just googling "constructive dismissal" and posting the first definition you find.
-
1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:
I'm not minimizing anything, nor did I didn't say it is acceptable to me.
This comment proves what I'm actually saying. You've already decided guilt based on only one side of the story. You assume that anyone who wants to know the other side of the story is a horrible human being who thinks sexual harassment is OK. Par for the course. Have an opinion based on part the information and then attack those who question your opinion.
Assuming that the contract has an end date that has passed, then the team doesn't have to renew it even if they have renewed it multiple times before. That's one difference between contract workers and employees.
Lets take Bailey as an example. Multiple contracts. Didn't do anything wrong. Bombers decided not to pick him up this year. No harm. No foul.
Again, it is not that cut and dried, and your comparison to a player contract is just plain silly. Apples and oranges. But I'm not going to explain all the nuances of employer/employee law to someone who believes that he knows way more than he clearly does.
-
11 minutes ago, Mike said:
Mostly just that everyone is already proclaiming this guy is guilty because he’s got a reputation and if it were a Bomber, there would be cries of “let the process play out”
I wonder if anyone ever stopped to wonder if the reason this became public is because he has this reputation and the woman knew this would be effective.
Disclaimer: if he’s guilty of the claims, he’s a total piece of crap
I just see the double standard here for what it is and someone’s right to due process shouldn't depend on what team colours they wear
Thank you so much for being the only level headed person here. What would we do without your insight into how "everyone" acts?
-
6 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:
It's not wrongful dismissal. They didn't dismiss her, they simply didn't pick up her next contract.
Corroboration of at least the bus part of the complaint should be easy, but we don't even have that yet, but assuming the story is true, and we only have her side of it, it's workplace harassment & likely uttering threats.
People need to stop throwing around terms like 'Sexual Predator'. It weakens the term so much as to be useless. Asking a girl out, even multiple times, and complaining that she was going out with someone else on a bus doesn't rise to the level of Sexual Predator.
Everyone jumping on the bandwagon to 'protect' her after only hearing her side of the story is exactly why they went to the media in the first place. Kelly & Murphy have already been convicted in the court of public opinion. The Argos can't attack her or the story without coming off as evil. IMO that's why we won't see anything in the press from there side.
If you do some research, you'll find that, depending on the contract, not renewing can be considered constructive dismissal, which is actionable by the employee. Without knowing all the terms of this particular contract, it's impossible to say if this is or isn't. Just that it's not that cut and dried.
-
9 minutes ago, Brandon said:
In fairness she could be mainly doing this for attention and/or to kill Kelly's reputation.
Yes, because complaints like this get you so much great attention...
-
9 minutes ago, Mike said:
I wonder how we’d be reacting to this news if it were about Dalton Schoen
If he was accused of what Kelly is alleged to have done, and if someone like Walters was alleged to have fired the victim and attempted to cover it up, I'd call for an investigation. If the investigation found that the victim's claims were accurate, I'd want them both gone, right now. Know why? Because it's the right thing to do, period. And that's not even considering that neither of them has the reputation of Kelly or Murphy. And again, for those that are suggesting that in this TO situation, the young woman is maybe looking for a quick payday, consider that the amount she's asking for isn't much at all by today's standards, and that sadly, she'll likely never be able to work in pro sports again. Something tells me that she has far more to lose than to gain from this situation. If that's the case, it might suggest something else entirely...
-
20 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:
For how long? Until the court case is done? Remember that the team itself has been named as part of the lawsuit, so it’s not as simple as “until their internal investigation is done”, since they are part of their own investigation. Do you think they will rule against themselves and admit wrongdoing if they plan to contest the civil suit? And suppose they find Kelly did wrong in their investigation and then he is cleared civilly in the suit - does he then have a wrongful termination suit against them? Or vice versa, they find he did no wrong and he loses the civil suit, does the employee get extra damages in another defamation suit against the club? Or does the court get tainted by the club’s findings, one way or another?
Too many folks here ready to tar and feather based on half the story only told so far from one side and not be patient enough to let the judicial process play out. Harmful to both sides.
Dude, it happens all the time in various lines of work. The investigation focuses on policies and procedures. If the company is smart, they hire an outside agency (often a law firm) to conduct the inquiry, which is an employment matter and completely separate from any other civil matter. It's actually the opposite of the tar and feather stuff you're accusing people of, but hey righteous indignation feels so good, right?
-
8 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:
Just for the sake of argument, What if the allegations by this coach are found to be not true & the Argos had already tossed Kelly on heresay to placate the fans of other teams calling for his blood. MLSE would be dragged into court & sued for millions of dollars in damages by Kelly. And while it's true MLSE has hundreds of millions of dollars that any judgement found against it would be but a pittance, the damage to the brand would be far, far worse. Let's see what the CFL does about this.
I'm not taking Kelly's side. I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here for the sake of discussion.
You don't turf him. You suspend him.
-
2 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:
The league can't act on heresay or a lawsuit. This will have to go to court.
Not at all true. An employer can initiate their own investigation. They can also suspend anyone involved until such time as the investigation concludes. It's actually a good idea to do so, for liability purposes.
-
But, but, but, Bluto's a great guy... Anyone who would put a child's game played by grown men ahead of wanting to see that if they did something as despicable as this is described to have happened is, in my opinion, not such a great guy. When you have a daughter have to deal with sexual violence, there can be zero tolerance for this kind of ****.
-
27 minutes ago, Wanna-B-Fanboy said:
Sure- but clearly that day ain't here yet.
But, I don't think @Fatty Liver's take is a horrible one.
Ya, because it's way easier to make excuses than it is to condemn that sort of action and take a stand...
Just now, Fatty Liver said:Do you not recognize a football locker room as an extremely rarefied environment that is seldom duplicated within the rest of society? I would also advise my daughter not to become a prison guard for her own mental and physical well being. You can wish for a rainbow and unicorn world all you like but that's not yet the current reality, and looking around at the world today, I'm not sure it's even on the distant horizon.
Gee, I wonder why that would be...
-
1 hour ago, Fatty Liver said:
If she was my daughter I'd advise taking a job working intimately with 100 football players with no other women in sight was not a good idea, something was bound to happen, and it did. For cripes sake, her contract only paid $25,000, she could have made more in any other situation.
Maybe instead of cautioning your daughter to limit herself because of what men might do, you could champion her right to take a job and tell men that they should keep their hands/comments to themselves. Your comment smacks of "look at the way she was dressed, she was asking for it". Don't teach girls to be careful, teach boys that that stuff is not ok.
52 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said:That may be the ideal, but it's not the reality.
That's nothing more than a pathetic excuse.
44 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said:Not at all, but you're naive if you think a testosterone filled locker room is a certified "work safe environment". Maybe part of her job was to shoot players up with pain killers so they can perform their duties for our amusement.
Pro tip: when you're in a hole, stop digging.
-
Just now, JuranBoldenRules said:
Not in a civil case re the burden of proof. Criminal yes. Civil complainints need to prove damages.
The burden of proof in a civil case still rests with the complainant. However the standard of proof needed goes from proof beyond a reasonable doubt to proof on the preponderance of evidence, so which side is more likely (sometimes described as 51%). On top of that, yes, there must be damage to the complainant as well.
-
If she's asking for 85,000, doesn't she realize that's 50 years of gate receipts for the Argos?
Seriously though, some of the comments here make me think that some of you have neither daughters, sisters or mothers. Yeah, women go public with complaints like this because they just love all the attention that it creates for them... Considering that by doing this, she's likely going to have almost zero chance of working in professional sports again (at least in the male side of things) I'd tend to think that rather than rushing to support Kelly or the team, a better response would be to demand that the team get to the bottom of this and if true, that several heads need to roll.
- rebusrankin, voodoochylde, Bigblue204 and 2 others
-
1
-
4
-
Couldn't happen to a nicer team.
- HardCoreBlue, Noeller and Rex_Banner
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Booch said:
I'd go for whom I've seen for best Bombers DBs as Hill..BOlden..Brown...Roy Bennet and James Jefferson...bar none..nobody since be even close...I would almost put Bolden first if he had a series of yrs together...dude had no business being up here and we were so lucky to have him a few times
So, you're saying that Juran Bolden rules?
-
As far as I can see, Lofton's being brought into battle with everyone else for the RT spot. Nothing more than that. I'm hoping they bring in someone better, but that's what training camp is for, right?
- Bigblue204, Noeller, rebusrankin and 1 other
-
1
-
3
-
31 minutes ago, Stickem said:
I've sat with veterans in the legion many times, and I assure you they would take a lot lighter stance on my comments about a 'football player'/ navy seal and his short tenure here, than you are...I do not kid about the military service of any veteran .....get that straight....As a football player , I think he's fair game in the public venue....Your crusade for the guy is wonderful but I'm sorry, I'm not going to retract or apologize for my comments and my 'lighten up' statement still stands....
AND as a side note ....quoting a guy like 'lyinguy' who called us a bunch of 'aholes' doesn't get you any points around here
As an aside, I'm a vet (Reserve) and I can tell you that no one is more brutal with slamming other units/branches than military people. And this is coming from someone affectionately (or not) known as a meathead.
- HardCoreBlue, Stickem, Noeller and 1 other
-
4
-
45 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:
I do. Is that bad?
If I ever sell cars, I would really appreciate your contact info!
2023/2024 Blue Bombers Off-Season Thread (BRADY’S BACK! DALTON’S BACK!)
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
Don't know about automatic, but I understand that the Riders will get a good discount on their tickets.