TrueBlue

And the Oilers have McDavid, but I'd rather have Scheifele and Wheeler for less. 

He had at times.  So did Lefevour.

Two points regarding this thread:
1)  Durant likely still believes he can compete as a starter somewhere.  Where?  I'm not sure.  If he came to grips with the reality, he likely would have agreed to a contract restructure.  Now he is unemployed.  Classic example of risk versus the reward.
2)  People can crap all over Davis all they want, but the truth of it is, he needs more playing time to actually get better.  Starting from scratch with someone with no experience is going back to square one yet again.   Regardless of how long Davis has been with the team, it's too soon to write him off for good. 

No offence at all to Bond, but I'd argue Randle is more of the "core" of this team than Bond. 

Calvillo and Allen both had shaky starts to their careers after significantly more playing time than Davis has had so far.  Allen in fact had under a 50% completion % and close to 1:1 TD/INT ratio for his first 5 seasons in the league. 

Calvillo and Allen both had shaky starts to their careers after significantly more playing time than Davis has had so far.  Allen in fact had under a 50% completion % and close to 1:1 TD/INT ratio for his first 5 seasons in the league. 

Randle no question. I really do think we need to work towards 3 Canadians on the OL. 

Would have rather let Hardrick walk and roll the dice on Bond as our RT.  I'm quite sure he can do it.

Poll Answer:  pissed I'm having to pick between the two. 

I'd be in the sign Randle camp for certain. He's been the most reliable corner we've possibly ever had as long as I've been a Bomber fan. Travis Bond is an exceptional American playing a traditionally Canadian position. I can see us getting by without Bond, but being lost in the desert without Randle. Simply put, Bond is a luxury; Randle is a necessity.

Two points regarding this thread:
1)  Durant likely still believes he can compete as a starter somewhere.  Where?  I'm not sure.  If he came to grips with the reality, he likely would have agreed to a contract restructure.  Now he is unemployed.  Classic example of risk versus the reward.
2)  People can crap all over Davis all they want, but the truth of it is, he needs more playing time to actually get better.  Starting from scratch with someone with no experience is going back to square one yet again.   Regardless of how long Davis has been with the team, it's too soon to write him off for good. 

Two points regarding this thread:
1)  Durant likely still believes he can compete as a starter somewhere.  Where?  I'm not sure.  If he came to grips with the reality, he likely would have agreed to a contract restructure.  Now he is unemployed.  Classic example of risk versus the reward.
2)  People can crap all over Davis all they want, but the truth of it is, he needs more playing time to actually get better.  Starting from scratch with someone with no experience is going back to square one yet again.   Regardless of how long Davis has been with the team, it's too soon to write him off for good. 

Two points regarding this thread:
1)  Durant likely still believes he can compete as a starter somewhere.  Where?  I'm not sure.  If he came to grips with the reality, he likely would have agreed to a contract restructure.  Now he is unemployed.  Classic example of risk versus the reward.
2)  People can crap all over Davis all they want, but the truth of it is, he needs more playing time to actually get better.  Starting from scratch with someone with no experience is going back to square one yet again.   Regardless of how long Davis has been with the team, it's too soon to write him off for good. 

On field officials call it wrong all the time, that's not what I am referring to. 
Highly unlikely you're seeing "an almost identical play" being challenged one game to the next.  If you are, please enlighten me with an example.   
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that on-field CFL officiating is consistent and without it's faults.   Far from it!

Call it a crapshoot or inconsistent or whatever you want, but what you're looking for and what the replay official is specifically looking for could be much different.   What makes you determine whether it's PI or not?  It's a fine line.  (This is a whole other problem.)
Are there mistakes either way?  Of course there are, but the system has made it better than what it used to be. 
 

Good info.  Just a personal suggestion from me:  Can you separate the titles of the books you refer to a little better so they are easier to identify?  (Eg. in bold, with capital letters, etc.)
Thanks.

Bruce Arians book is called The QB Whisperer. Its a good read.

Congrats on a great CFL career Trent.  Thanks for gracing us with your talent north of the border.  We'll see you in the CFL HOF soon enough. 

Congrats on a great CFL career Trent.  Thanks for gracing us with your talent north of the border.  We'll see you in the CFL HOF soon enough. 

Congrats on a great CFL career Trent.  Thanks for gracing us with your talent north of the border.  We'll see you in the CFL HOF soon enough. 

Congrats on a great CFL career Trent.  Thanks for gracing us with your talent north of the border.  We'll see you in the CFL HOF soon enough.