Mike
-
Posts
9,199 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
35
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Mike
-
-
if he was injured and could not play, he would not have been dressed. Period. He said so himself that he was healthy and able (I realise most players will say that but when a player is injured, he knows he is injured).
I think it was far more likely that Mack made the call to start Buck and they used the excuse that Buck was "banged up" with the intent that Goltz would play well (someone somewhere, likely Mack, thought the issue was the QB not the OC) and then there would be no controversey because everyone would want the best QB start. When that didnt happen and Burke maybe wanted to go back to Buck, Mack came up with the "new starter for rest of season" plan.
That's not how it works. You have to dress three QBs. It's not optional.
Not true (unless the league or the PA has made changes in the CBA in that regard). in 2003, the club dressed Khari Jones and Brian Stallworth as their ONLY quarterbacks for a number of games while Pat Barnes was trying out with the Cleveland Browns.
True, you got me on a minor technicality.
You don't have to dress three quarterbacks according to the CBA but you can only dress 39 non-quarterbacks so if you sit Buck, you only dress 41 players. I guess technically, they could have put him on the 1-game IR and not put him in uniform, but if he's available that would be a silly option considering you can be too injured to play QB but be healthy enough to say ... take a knee to end a half or pin the ball on a convert or something.
-
if he was injured and could not play, he would not have been dressed. Period. He said so himself that he was healthy and able (I realise most players will say that but when a player is injured, he knows he is injured).
I think it was far more likely that Mack made the call to start Buck and they used the excuse that Buck was "banged up" with the intent that Goltz would play well (someone somewhere, likely Mack, thought the issue was the QB not the OC) and then there would be no controversey because everyone would want the best QB start. When that didnt happen and Burke maybe wanted to go back to Buck, Mack came up with the "new starter for rest of season" plan.
That's not how it works. You have to dress three QBs. It's not optional.
-
I think the issue is the distraction.
I dont think this season has been fair to any of the three QB's, to be fair. The O has looked bad no matter who is there. We just fired the OC. It's been acknowledged that his system didnt fit the CFL.
We can't point to Buck's injury history as an issue this season because he hasn't missed a game due to injury.
If he starts this week and plays well, then what? it's entirely possible. It's also possible Goltz would play better under Marcel. But all things being equal (and they arent anyway), I'd go with the only QB we have with CFL experience and the only QB we have that has ever won anything.
Yes he has ...
Which game did he miss? I dont recall any game where he was not dressed and ready to play.
He was listed as the #3 QB because we had to dress three but he would not have played.
-
I think the issue is the distraction.
I dont think this season has been fair to any of the three QB's, to be fair. The O has looked bad no matter who is there. We just fired the OC. It's been acknowledged that his system didnt fit the CFL.
We can't point to Buck's injury history as an issue this season because he hasn't missed a game due to injury.
If he starts this week and plays well, then what? it's entirely possible. It's also possible Goltz would play better under Marcel. But all things being equal (and they arent anyway), I'd go with the only QB we have with CFL experience and the only QB we have that has ever won anything.
Yes he has ...
-
Assume we go with Buck. Makes sense. Changes to the offense, short week to get it done, new OC. Better to have the veteran in there. WHomever you like at QB, I think we can agree the veteran is likely to have a better understanding of a revamped offence.
I think it somewhat eliminates a distraction too. Sure, the QB position will be a distraction until we have a bonafide starter but putting Buck back in almost seems like a calming move at this point. The QB controversey and switching from guy to guy is closely related to the upheavel of the Mack era. That is behind us now. Best to reset things, go with the veteran, calm the issue down and get back to playing. If Buck struggles, then Goltz goes in, just as he would have at any point in the season.
How is it going to eliminate a distraction? For the entire time he's been here, Buck has been the distraction.
-
The biggest thing Crowton struggled with was his playcalling more than his schemes, in my opinion.
The schemes weren't always the greatest but I thought he brought some interesting looks to our offense. It's just too bad that ultimately, he could never get over the hump where he acknowledged he only had two downs to move the chains.
-
-
at this point, its likely the right call. We shall see what Marcel thinks, hopefully he will declare his starter at the presser today.
At no point is it ever the right call.
-
I hope Bellefeuille picks his guy (I'd still say it should be Goltz, but Hall is fine, too) and just sticks with him for the last 11 games of the season. Let's see if we have ourselves a starting QB for next year and beyond, and let's see them actually develop.
Penton's article this morning says we should expect Pierce behind centre this week.
Sigh.
This team never learns.
I'm just so defeated.
-
Wow Reilly had more yards in this one game then our qbs have had in the last 3 combined!
51 yards of passing came on throwing into triple coverage, and completing the pass on a double tip drill. 9 times out of 10 it was an INT.
Sometimes the breaks fall for you sometimes they don't... at least he moved the ball. It's to bad that Ricky did an even better job.
I totally agree with you.
But if that's your stance, why did you post this about Hall the other day:
he was lucky that he didn't have around 4-5 interceptions. His bullets down the field were very dangerous and under thrown."Sometimes the breaks fall for you" .. unless you're Max Hall, then it's just your fault apparently?
-
Updated OP to include week 8 stats
-
I use first names for certain people around here (TBurgess, TrueBlue, 17to85, Noeller, Raydawg, Mr. Perfect) just because I've spent so much time talking football with them that it seems awkward for me to call them something else. Or I guess in some cases, I actually see them outside of this forum so I feel weird using a handle to address them.
But if anyone had an issue with it, they're free to say so and I'd stop.
-
Just one last thing I want to say about using people names here instead of their handles. On one of the Stampeder threads a few years back, I said something uncomplimentary about a CFL exec that I knew. I had no idea that he read CFL sites & suddenly I got this scathing email from him basically asking me to renounce what I said online. He was clearly angry & I felt I better do that or I might have a potential defamation suit to deal with as he knew me & who I was. We all say things online because we are anonymous that we wouldn't otherwise say if our identities were clear. After that experience, I don't want my name ever used & that is why I am against using first names or exposing identities on sites like this. Anyway nuff said & back to the subject of this thread.
Everything I say on here would be just as easy for me to say in public. I'm not hiding behind anything.
An unnamed reporter (very popular round these parts) asked me to take down a post about him that I made on OB a few years ago. I told him to shove it. Defamation suit my rear end.
-
If someone uses an actual name as their handle then fine that's what you call them as we don't know any other name to call them. But for me, I wouldn't appreciate anyone calling me by my first name unannounced on a CFL site unless I was asked first. As a veteran poster of many CFL sites over the last 13 years, I've always used iso_55 as my handle. I've never changed it. Some people on different sites know my first name but rarely if ever use it & I know their first names & never use theirs so I reciprocate. When someone calls someone "Ross" & the poster he called Ross is talking about insider info on the Bombers, what am I supposed to think? Now, maybe it's a cynical joke but all it does is raise questions as to the identity of the person being named. I dunno, maybe I'm out in left field. Am I wrong?
I think your stance is a bit too serious for my personal tastes, but to each his own.
-
Do we really want to call people by their first names? I just think that practice should be frowned upon. We're all anonymous here & it should stay that way.
I agree.
-
I'm thinking Dickenson and Howell are the only coaches who should stay past the 2013 season.
As for who replaces who, it all depends on the head coach. Nelson might be a great pick, but his style may clash with whoever is the new head honcho. We need people in key positions who not only have experience with the Canadian game (and a history of at least some success), but who work well together.
While I agree with some of the sentiment on this site that a lot of our problems come down to coaching, I think on the defense (especially in the secondary) talent is big issue. So whoever gets brought in, we need to improve the talent of our secondary and probably linebacking. I'm very satisfied with our D-line and hope we can keep those guys around.
I have to say, I wonder why people around here like Howell so much.
He sure hasn't helped Matthews this year. Or Denmark. Or Poblah.
I'd get rid of Howell too.
-
-
Assuming only rostered players are in the draft (not guys who teams own CFL rights to like Bilikudi and Mulumba):
Greaves, Swiston, Pencer, Etienne, Kohlert, Muamba
If Bilikudi and Mulumba are included, I'd knock off one of the receivers and protect Mulumba.
I find it interesting that you'd protect JE
-
The CFL has some extremely stupid rules. When the Stamps convert was blocked last game, the Riders were penalized for No Yards. What kind of frigging rule is that? The team that blocks a convert or FG & it crosses the LOS & the blocking team gets a penalty???? Bush league.
Get this ... Brenden Labatte has legitimately been called for pass interference this year.
How does that happen?
-
-
you'd fit in so well in Queen West or Roncey... especially if your brought your thick-rimmed black glasses
$23 for 15 cans.
Can't beat it.
-
-
i don't think anyone cares about the game anymore.
what game?
-
Robyn looks like hers...
as an aside: can somebody please post the depth charts?
http://www.morningbigblue.com/community/topic/560-depth-chart-vs-hamilton-week-7/
Rod Pedersen on the Bombers
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
If I was running our team, I'm sure I'd have drunk dialed Jim Barker and tried to trade Tim Burke, Henoc Muamba and our next three draft picks for Ricky Ray by now.