TBURGESS

We won less games this year than we did last year, even tho we had a better team on paper. We didn't get a home playoff game. We were 4th overall and 3rd in the West. We played our best games during the stretch run, which hasn't happened for years. We had one of, if not the, healthiest team going into the play offs. I'd guess, without checking, that we had the least number of man games lost to injury during the season. We beat a Riders team who were forced to play their backup QB by 5 points in the semi and that backup QB missed 4 open receivers who were behind our defense. We lost to a Stamps team with 4 injured starting receivers. The progress has been painfully slow. It took 5 years to get a single playoff win, but that win saved MOS's job. Winnipeg Blue Bombers fans and management are happy with being a middle of the pack team that wins enough games to make it to the playoffs and who sometimes even wins a playoff game.

I can only think of one game this year that Nichols was a difference maker. The rest, Streveler could have won too. I'd be happy to have both back next year except for the fact that Nichols will be getting $450K. If your making that kind of money, you better be significantly better than a rookie and Nichols simply said, wasn't. We could offer him less money in the off season but I don't see Walters/MOS doing that and I doubt Nichols would agree to it. I expect that both are back next year. Nichols is the starter. Streveler will get less playing time than he got this year unless Nichols is hurt. Some short yardage and a few series to slowly develop him. By years end, we will be wondering if Streveler is good enough, if he can read defenses, if he can run our offense. He'll want a starters job so he'll sign with another team who gives him a real chance.

Nichols salary is going up by 50K next year, so no, it's not the same SMS hit as this year.

Can he? Who knows? No way to tell because he wasn't given a chance to find out. Nichols makes $450K next year. Is he worth that much? Nope. Would an extra $450K help us out in other areas? You bet. We could bring in a decent backup QB and a play making receiver or returner. Would it be better to live through the growing pains that are likely coming or stay with Nichols and hope the rest of the team can win games so he only has to mange them and not throw picks?

Let me get this straight.. You're blaming the loss on a 23 year old QB who came in cold and threw a single pass, not on the expensive vet QB who hadn't even thrown for 100 yards before the last 4 minutes of the game? SMH!

Harris - Heart and soul of the team Medlock - Made all the FG's including a 57 yarder Alexander - Forced a fumble that almost turned the game around for us. Roh for tracking down BLM from behind.

I think it comes down to can the Stamps stop or at least control Harris. If they can, I don't see us getting the win unless we win the turnover battle by 2.

I mostly agree, but I'd give them the edge at receiver. We're likely starting Lankford. I'd give them the edge at DB. Their group is better than ours because they don't have a weak spot like Fogg. Our kick coverage wasn't good last week.

Seems about right. What did Chungh do though?

Every flag causes a delay. I have more faith in the eye in the sky and their multiple angles than I do in a ref on the field whose viewing angle might be distorted or blocked. That was the whole reason the last 2 QB head shots were 'missed'.

I'm not suggesting that a team would have to challenge. I suggesting that the eye in the sky be allowed to apply the penalty without a challenge. They are already supposed to be spotting concussions.

Seems like the wrong way to fix the problem to me. Just let the eye in the sky call them.

The challenge aspect of the game used to be broken, but now it's mostly fixed. Add in some additional eye in the sky responsibilities for roughing penalties and it's good to go IMO. Challenges are supposed to be to fix obvious reffing mistakes. The clear cut ones that you are complaining about. Coaches having to state what they are challenging doesn't remove the fishing aspect. It just means they can't challenge one thing and hope for a different thing to be called (which is a good change). Adding more challenges only if the coach is right wouldn't make any difference to us this week. MOS still wouldn't have challenged the forward pass/lateral cuz it wasn't a guarantee so he may lose his timeout and his ability to challenge again. He wouldn't have challenged the PI in the end zone for the same reason. Jones on the other hand would have used his 2nd challenge to get the hit to the head called then would have used a 3rd one as a de facto time out on the next play.

1 challenge is enough, especially if the eye in the sky can overturn badly missed calls like head shots. I don't want a return to fishing challenges every game.

That's the same story we've told for the last decade or so about the Bomber/Rider grey cup.

I don't think the PI would have been overturned, so I agree with MOS on that one. I do think it was a lateral, not a forward pass, but we didn't get the ball, so it would have been a wasted challenge, because it would just have pushed them back.

Crazy indeed. Bridge missed a wide open guy in the end zone, missed a deep ball to a wide open guy that resulted in PI and grossly under threw a wide open receiver for a pick. He also had some bad luck hitting an upright for another open receiver in the end zone. Any one of those plays makes up for his running.

Franklin? Wore out his welcome in Toronto. Still has some upside. I agree that Lulay is done. New coach may want his own QB, so Jennings could be available. He's an upgrade over Bridge and doesn't have Collaros' concussion history. Glenn? Too old. Likely done. Reilly and BLM are both going to be 'available'. Would the Riders pay big bucks for either and would either want to go there considering their O line?

Harris - The guy that makes our offense work Wolo - Great TD Bennett - Game saving special teams tackle HH - The goal post for taking a TD away from the Riders

21-0 aaand it's over. Didn't see that coming.

Brandon Banks says hi.

62 Grey Cups. 2 teams in each. 124 chances to make it to a Grey Cup. 5 wins in those 62 Grey Cups. Stats were to get some conversation going. How you interpret them is up to you. Some may even say it means we're due.

Not saying we can't or won't win. I'm just posting the stats.

3rd place teams making it to the Grey Cup - 9 times out of 124 chances or 7.26% 3rd place teams winning the Grey Cup - 5 out of 62 games or 8.06% Last time a 3rd place team won the Grey Cup -2005 Edmonton Last time the Bomber beat the Riders in a playoff game - 1965

I'm not selling anything. Just the facts. You think Nichols would have done as well in the same situation? (No Adams, Dressler, Harris or Chungh)