StrevyISaBEAST

Me too, Mainly because of Browns poise off the bench, and Zach crapping the bed in the last 2 cups. 

Hello Everyone,
longtime reader here. just decided to sign up.
you've all provided great analysis and wondering if like me, you think we should have paid to keep dru after deveoping him and seeing his on field skills?

Me too, Mainly because of Browns poise off the bench, and Zach crapping the bed in the last 2 cups. 

Tough Problem to have eh?... 😆
Dru impressed me is all. I think long term a bigger upside than Zach. But I love Zach too. Just sucks to see brown go

That's fine if you think that my post is dumb, HCB.
I have a similar opinion of being mandated to take an untested, unproven, known bad side effects, brand new technology and calling it the science. Or insisting that isn't blind faith.
Either way, you've the freedom to take as many of them as you please. But you don't have the freedom to use the word effective and expect to not hear some pretty obvious, elephant-in-the-room type of questions.

FDA approves new monovalent shot based on "manufacturers data" and no clinical trials. They also approved it for 12+ year-olds and authorized its use from 6 month to 11 years. 
I'll sit this one out. Good luck everyone and stay well.

I'd have rolled the dice with streveler and brown personally but might not have been an option. Feel better letting brown go assuming we keep streveler anyway. Collaros has a year or two left IMO before he needs to be replaced.

Your name says it all....StrevyISaBEAST.  I can't prove it, but I think the decision to move on from Brown was decided last year when Strevy came to town and watch a game. I think that there was more going on then that. Discussions with the Bombers started imo. 
That being said, Love Dru and think he will be successful. Unfortunately, our QB room is just a little too talented right now to let him have his chance here.  Zach still has a couple good years left, and Dru's time is now.

It usually goes like this:
Q: Do you think that the C-19 shots are Safe & Effective.
A: Absolutely.
Q: So you got them?
A: Yes.
Q: Did you ever get Covid?
A: A few times.
Q: So they're Effective?
A: Yup.
Q: It works?
A: Yes, I may have gotten even more sick without it.
Q: Are you at all aware of this shot's side effect profile?
A: A bit.
Q: It doesn't concern you at all?
A: No, they must have tested it.
... OK, I'm out.

Looks like "safe & effective" is finally dead as a trope. From the NCI commissioners report (Sept 15):
 
“It is important to understand that the COVID-19 vaccines were never approved under the traditional approval process for drugs in Canada,” 
“Under the alternative authorization process, the necessity to establish the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines through an objective manner appears to have been set aside.”
“This cannot be an appropriate standard for approving a drug that the Government intends to administer to the entire population. It is difficult to conceive of a less-scientific test for drug authorization than that found in the Interim Order.”
“The result was that while chief medical officers across the country repeatedly assured Canadians that the COVID-19 vaccines were ‘safe and effective’—the general Canadian population had no understanding that their authorization process had not required objective proof of safety nor efficacy.”
“We all know there's a new vaccine that's coming around the corner, [a] new mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. And there's essentially no evidence for it, there's been no clinical trial done in human beings showing that it benefits people, there's been no clinical trial showing that it is a safe product for people. And not only that, but then there are a lot of red flags.”
 
https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/commissioners-report/