deepsixemtoboyd

Holy ****

Okay.. come on this f’in D… Make one stop.

I had so hoped the D had turned the corner based on last week.

Needed a few more 7’s...

All that extra time of possession...

I can’t agree with this. I feel the game is improved by limiting the challenges. There were a lot of fishing expeditions going on. In terms of your point that there is now a significant amount of pressure on which play you’re going to use that challenge on, you are 100% correct. But by that standard, why wouldn’t MOS uses his challenge on a play that would’ve moved the ball down to the 1 yard line with a fresh set of downs? He has also made several mystifying challenges in previous games that would give us a first down at her own 35 yard line in 2nd quarter. It’s these type of decisions that leave me questioning our head coach.

Those two series where we were struggling to protect the football now seem like an aberration… Whoa… Big balls play by Nichols right there.

Yes, on that I believe you are correct. I was merely commenting on how they are supposed to call the challenge. That said, the CFL officiating has been wildly inconsistent on this issue and have never gone by their own rules: namely, the standard for a overruling of the call on the field is irrefutable, definitive evidence.

Well, penalty aided or not, that was a big-time response by the Winnipeg offense.

Technically speaking, they may have got it right; there needs to be irrefutable evidence to overturn the call on the field. I am not sure we 100% met that standard. What bugs me, however, is on the earlier challenge from Campbell where they did over rule, there was also not definitive evidence.

The bombers just got jobbed on the challenge; however, O’Shea missed his chance for a most impactful challenge earlier. Bad coaching.

MOS should have challenged on the pass to Dressler in the end zone. Defender was screening; absolutely did not look for the ball. It would’ve been a high percentage, very smart challenge.

I am neither angry nor disgusted. Rather, I am amused. Your sentiments are sweet and delusional… And, yes, you are absolutely entitled to them. Enjoy!

Yes, indeed, them's the key words: "he needs to do it again next week." Yes, Nichols had a controlled, pretty mistake-free game last night at home against the team with the worst record in the CFL. That's good. It's certainly better than the alternative: crapping the bed and losing to the worst team at home. That said, let's hold off on the heavy kudos for now. Judgment is reserved about his rehabilitation until he can do it against a plus .500 club from the West. After all, that's the acid test, no? Those are the teams we will need to beat if we hope to take home the chalice.

It's helpful whenever anyone mentions Mike Kelly, because that almost makes me grateful for MOS.

This is a beautiful mixed metaphor. Thank you!

There's such a thing as appropriately confident and self-assured, and then there's just flat-out delusional. Our coach is a nice guy who is the latter. While I don't share J5V's vociferousness about him (that I felt for Mike Kelly or even the hapless Burke), I certainly find it curious how many folks are seemingly eager to defend this paragon of mediocrity. I mean, **** guys, the man is 3 games below .500 over a 5 year career with not a single playoff victory under his belt. Is that good enough for y'all?

That was good. Thanks.

God, the only thing that would make the current seeming **** show more of a joke is to have the washed-up, super-thin-skinned Durant running the offense. Guy's a total ****.

This absolutely nails it. It was obvious after the 2016 season that the offense had radically improved, that Nichols was in a zone as was Harris, but that neither of these players were getting any younger and thus the window was closing… It was equally clear that the defense was ****. MOS, however, true to form went all stubborn, retaining Hall not only for 2017 - which was already absolutely inexcusable – but then actually doubling down on his stupidity by retaining him again this year. The defense, while modestly improved this year, continues to be far, far, so far from a championship calibre side. Case in point? They were pretty good yesterday against a very mediocre Saskatchewan offense BUT... when they absolutely had to make stops, Mason ran all over them in the second half. I was there… I know. I saw it with my own eyes. The fact that Richie Hall is still here 2 seasons beyond when he should have been and that this madness continues was 100% completely avoidable and is, quite frankly, disgusting. Now the window on Nichols seems to be closing and we have a total train wreck as a result… All of this is 100% on MOS.

Victim how? Isn’t he the one who hired and has continued to stubbornly retain all of his subordinates? Hint: this is a rhetorical question. If he is a victim, he has been victimized by his own hand.

Bring it on, man! It'll be cathartic, for you and your "small but devoted following" (I count myself one of those)...

Well, we are in a circular argument now... They’re usually promoted on the basis of some of the measures of success and indicators of competence described by me and others in previous posts. I’ve suggested Buck lacks these fundamental indicators in sufficient measure to warrant such a promotion.

Don’t get me wrong: I think buck’s very likeable as a person. I once sat next to him on a plane and he seemed very polite and decent. Maybe he does bring something as a QB coach? I really have no way of knowing. That said, I have never been able to understand the love affair that some Peggers had/have with Buck as a football pro. Being a super nice and passionate guy didn’t make him a effective QB and does not translate into him being an effective offensive coordinator. To me, the way he carries himself, his lack of coaching experience, and his overall lack of success as a quarterback simply don’t inspire confidence that he could get it done or would be an improvement on Lapo. In sum: I have no ill will against a man, I just don’t want to see him as our OC and don’t see any rational, compelling evidence to the contrary.

What evidence do you have that Buck would be effective? When has he ever been effective? He never won a Grey Cup, threw 18 picks against 14 TD’s in his best season here (2011- we went to the Cup that year in spite of him not because of him), and he has never struck me as even close to cerebral or well-spoken or even clear during interviews (whereas a guy like Dickenson or Maas or Clements all showed better on all those measures).