Mark H.

Hebert was a hard-hitting safety whose coverage weren't always great, he had undisciplined tendencies but often generated turnovers. Walls was a fundamentally sound strong side DE who was disciplined and always kept contain very well. A hybrid of the two would be - interesting

There was this other QB who looked done - good coaching and protection scheme revived his career

A post-Tamam regime. You just can't deny his long-standing management history. Made worse by Chris Jones 2009 anyone?

Thanks for providing the correct info - be interesting to see if they keep him around for '17

Force Labatte and Durant to eat their wheaties.

Meh. You don't have to agree with me, nor I with you.

After watching Reilly shred the Argos vertically, I think the Esks would have to take the night off and even then the Riders would probably still lose.

Stop spoiling massive arguments with facts

Willy may be a lot of things, but injury prone is not one of them. There isn't a QB in the league who wouldn't have missed time playing for the Bombers last year.

Keep going - who was he covering? How many of those plays were zone or cover zero?

Football will always come down to the big plays, which more often than not are turnovers. Of course you can't always rely on turnovers but maybe next game Dressler goes deep or ST makes a few big plays. IMO it doesn't matter where your big plays are coming from - you have to have playmakers and disrupters in every phase of the game. I think they call that football...been awhile since we had it consistently

Yep, 4 screens showing the Jays & not even one showing the CFL. Our server asked but whoever was in charge didn't tune it in.

Has anyone else had trouble getting BP to show a CFL game?

Exactly. After your QB & blind side OT, halfbacks are the most important players on the CFL field

I'm not sure we need too worry to much about a defense figuring Nicholls out. Sure they have three games worth of film and some time to break it down, but he and the coaches also have time to tweak the attack.

Great stuff guys

Fair comment

I don't think Edmonton is a model O, that's not my point. I just think receiving threats like Bowman force the front 7 to back off. He's a consistent threat to gain 15+ yards on plays where Reilly only has to hold the ball for a second or two. Andrew Harris could possibly be something similar for us.

I know I keep saying this - but a more dynamic receiving would make the OL look better - look at all the sacks Milt prevented by reading cover 0 and going straight up the middle.

A quick release combined with being a threat downfield on a regular basis. Look at Edmonton - teams have to respect the threat of their receivers downfield as well Bowman's ability to create YAC. That immediately leads to fewer players teeing off on their OL & QB.

The elephant in the room is the almost complete lack of a vertical passing game. Teams are stacking the LOS, which is why Harris has had so little success. If they can't force the Esks D to back off, we will see more of the same.

The D was pretty good. They adjusted well to injuries in the secondary and also stopped Messam in the 2nd half

Hey Mr. Mike - they gonna take that away - then what?

It was a decent team, but teams were beginning to clue in on their scheme - chickens came home roost in '08

I would also add - they didn't have Canadian backing up Gauthier, banking on him staying healthy, which he did.