17to85

This is the most moronic statement on this board since I tried to say Patrick Lavoie was a franchise player. Crucify Bucknor but give Hurl a pass... ridiculous. Woods, Elimimian/Bighill, Sherritt, Simpson, Reed/Lawrence Yeah, you only NEED an allstar MLB if you want to win... that's all. Moot point - Jasper Simmons replaces Hurl next week anyway. Well just as a comparison Hurl has more tackles than Sherritt does... so what's your criteria for LBs then? Passport? Hurl isn't a super star but he's not a liability either. BC has had a defence for a while that puts a lot of it on the middle linebacker, makes sense to do that when you have guys like Elemimian and Bighill back there, but that's only one way to play D. So you think Hurl is as good as Sherritt? No I'm just making a comparison of stats between one supposed elite MLB and one guy who is apparently not very good at the position. I guess that's why I didn't quote any stats... If there is one revealing stat, its that bombers are worst in the league against the run - a lot of that is on the MLB. And here I thought it was because we had a poor defensive line too. I'd put that as a bigger flaw in the run defence than the linebackers.

The concern with BC is that Lulay will figure it out towards the end of the season and they won't be as bad as they are now. Bombers need to get their crap together and build up a bit of a cushion on them.

Reid was basically the non **** head version of Kenton Thief. Give him some room and he'd go for a lot of yards, if it was tough going though he didn't have the ability to make something out of nothing. Really good player though.

This is the most moronic statement on this board since I tried to say Patrick Lavoie was a franchise player. Crucify Bucknor but give Hurl a pass... ridiculous. Woods, Elimimian/Bighill, Sherritt, Simpson, Reed/Lawrence Yeah, you only NEED an allstar MLB if you want to win... that's all. Moot point - Jasper Simmons replaces Hurl next week anyway. Well just as a comparison Hurl has more tackles than Sherritt does... so what's your criteria for LBs then? Passport? Hurl isn't a super star but he's not a liability either. BC has had a defence for a while that puts a lot of it on the middle linebacker, makes sense to do that when you have guys like Elemimian and Bighill back there, but that's only one way to play D. So you think Hurl is as good as Sherritt? No I'm just making a comparison of stats between one supposed elite MLB and one guy who is apparently not very good at the position.

I think it's more a function of teams using the 3rd linebacker spot as an additional secondary spot and you really have 2 linebackers and no true middle linebacker. Just two guys who chase down ball carriers in pretty similar positions.

This is the most moronic statement on this board since I tried to say Patrick Lavoie was a franchise player. Crucify Bucknor but give Hurl a pass... ridiculous. Woods, Elimimian/Bighill, Sherritt, Simpson, Reed/Lawrence Yeah, you only NEED an allstar MLB if you want to win... that's all. Moot point - Jasper Simmons replaces Hurl next week anyway. Well just as a comparison Hurl has more tackles than Sherritt does... so what's your criteria for LBs then? Passport? Hurl isn't a super star but he's not a liability either. BC has had a defence for a while that puts a lot of it on the middle linebacker, makes sense to do that when you have guys like Elemimian and Bighill back there, but that's only one way to play D.

You have to admit, calgarys lb core is much more talented then ours with the exception of bass (if current trends continue) randle really ought to be back in the secondary and hurl, while coming along, is no simpson. It cant be at all shocking that we would want to add a simmons to our group after seeing how well he can ball while in ottawa. but doing nothing in his 2 years in Toronto and then not even being able to crack the game day roster in Calgary has to be a concern right? I'm going to temper expectations and take a wait and see approach before jumping all over one good year in a poor defence.

NDP meddling in provincial politics again, surprise surprise. How can Quebec be so gaga for that party when all they care about is having everything centralized in ottawa?

You don't NEED an allstar middle linebacker. Once people get over that jonesing for the real sexy player at the position you'll see that Hurl is OK. Unspectacular but not a liability.

HA! you think Philly is giving up all that for one year of Buff? Best you can get is 1st round pick and a B prospect. Sanheim has taken big strides since being drafted. He ain't moving for a rental player.

He brings nothing to the defense at the MLB position. I don't care how 'decent' he looks, the position requires someone better who can change a game with one play.

You ask that question as if the Stamps LB crew was filled with Neil Mcklinley, Wade Miller and Scott Mennie but he couldn't even get on the roster never mind starting.

Harper became aware of spending issues, ordered senators to repay the questionable expenses. Was unaware Wright paid Duffy. If anything, Harper's hands are clean here. Just because the left leaning media keeps asking the questions hoping for a different answer doesnt mean Harper is lying. If we want to look at party members to judge the leader, here are some examples: Erin Weir: "Canadians who favour lower greenhouse gas emissions might thank OPEC for imposing a global carbon tax that far outstrips anything environmentalists have been able to implement." Seonaugh MacPherson: "In my view, the notion that we serve the "middle class" is equally as problematic" Linda McQuaig: "So the claim "its my money - I earned it" is not only embarrassingly egotistical but essentially wrong" Andrew Seagram: "Idolizing our soldiers as heroes, a God like stature on par with Hercules, is as dangerous as proselytizing a suicide bomber as a martyr" Scott Andrews: "The tar sand emit more carbon emissions than some European countries alone. Those dirty sting baggers should be scaled down over a few years until they are no more." Scott Andrews: "Your prime Minister might be an ******* when he says stuff like 'Israel is a light of freedom and democracy in what is otherwise a region of darkness'" Scott Andrews: "Time for a boycott" (Speaking on Israel) Seonaigh MacPherson: "Oil continues to soil our democracy" Erin Weir: "I feel no hypocrisy in applauding the efforts of bot OPEX and Canpotex to raise commodity prices" Erin Weir: "Income splitting would undermine the economic independence of women" Hans Marotte: "When a Palestinian asks me to sign his declaration of support for the intifada, I see how important it is not to close in on oneself" Additionally, Morgan Wheeldon resigned after his Anti-Israel remarks gained attention. Liberal candidate Ala Buzerba also stepped down after some nasty twitter posts were revealed. There is an uncomfortable amount of anti-Israel (bordering on defense of terrorists and rogue nations) and anti-Alberta sentiment in the left. Im not sure Canadians understand how badly the NDP wants to decimate the oil industry or what that might do to the Canadian economy. These are all legitimate positions that voters can choose to support or not. But they are far more important to this election than the Duffy trial. So you read the meetthendp website too huh?

but is that a function of the entire interior of the OL being weak compared to a strong secondary with one weak spot? Lord knows no one can tell what is happening on the OL either. I stand by my claims that because the OL has been such a sore spot for this team people just automatically zero in on it where as the secondary outside of that one spot is actually very good. I'd take the other 4 guys and stack them up against anyones secondary.

Things you can say about any political party that has formed government. They all pile up skeletons in the closet.

I could just have blind faith that the coaches are infallible. That always works right? Never been a coach made wrong decisions in the past right? That's not a defense to you not knowing what you're talking about. it is when you've been around for the entire debate

Hard to really avoid putting the title on anyone not on the o-line. Removing Bucknor would have a lesser impact in the game than removing Picard or Neufeld. But that's as I said before a function of an attention grabbing spot vs. a spot that you can traditionally hide a weaker player in. Doesn't mean the guy in the hidden spot is better, just that it's less obvious on a play to play basis. I also believe it's a function of the OL struggling as a group where as the secondary outside of Bucknor is pretty ******* good. "Traditionally" maybe you do hide a weaker player at Bucknor's position, but does that put him in the weakest player category by default? I'll concede that Picard is in a more obvious, and more scrutinized position, but his gaffes have been more costly to the team than anything that Bucknor has done. Really? Cause Bucknor getting picked on has lead to a bunch of TD and 2 point converts being given up. The guy was **** last year too but he made a lot of tackles so people mistakenly thought that was good. No it just means teams were picking on him. You don't know enough to know if that's true or not.....not that that ever stops you I could just have blind faith that the coaches are infallible. That always works right? Never been a coach made wrong decisions in the past right?

Honestly I think this senate "scandal" is overblown. Senators having iffy expenses is nothing new and certainly not just a conservative problem.... it's just that it looks bad considering how much noise the Conservatives made about things like that. People are so angry at Harper because reasons they will blow any little thing out of proportion. I'd like to see people focussed on real things rather than trying to make smaller things into big deals.

Hard to really avoid putting the title on anyone not on the o-line. Removing Bucknor would have a lesser impact in the game than removing Picard or Neufeld. But that's as I said before a function of an attention grabbing spot vs. a spot that you can traditionally hide a weaker player in. Doesn't mean the guy in the hidden spot is better, just that it's less obvious on a play to play basis. I also believe it's a function of the OL struggling as a group where as the secondary outside of Bucknor is pretty ******* good. "Traditionally" maybe you do hide a weaker player at Bucknor's position, but does that put him in the weakest player category by default? I'll concede that Picard is in a more obvious, and more scrutinized position, but his gaffes have been more costly to the team than anything that Bucknor has done. Really? Cause Bucknor getting picked on has lead to a bunch of TD and 2 point converts being given up. The guy was **** last year too but he made a lot of tackles so people mistakenly thought that was good. No it just means teams were picking on him.

And we wonder why the middle class is being squeezed in this country and in the US. the middle class is being squeezed because manufacturing jobs are done more cheaply over seas than locally.

It's better to be the hammer than the nail for a change. We've had so many soft players come through here in the past several years it's refreshing to get one that pounds opponents. I haven't liked a LBer this much in their rookie season since Joe Lobendahn. I liked Ian Wild in his rookie season more. Maybe not the big hitter, but dude was all over the field making tackles. Just had a nose for the ball carrier.

Hard to really avoid putting the title on anyone not on the o-line. Removing Bucknor would have a lesser impact in the game than removing Picard or Neufeld. But that's as I said before a function of an attention grabbing spot vs. a spot that you can traditionally hide a weaker player in. Doesn't mean the guy in the hidden spot is better, just that it's less obvious on a play to play basis. I also believe it's a function of the OL struggling as a group where as the secondary outside of Bucknor is pretty ******* good.

Why do people care?

which is silly since there's only 24 starters on a team

I'm a pretty big JFG fan, but when Dave first brought up this ridiculous idea on FB, my response was "JFG"... Again though why not say what I originally said, I said Bucknor is arguably the worst starter on the team, you then went into a tizzy trying to claim that it was an outrageous idea. I also told you the guy I'd say it's close with is Picard, and that seems a well agreed upon idea there that Picard is one of the worst. Blind homerism in defending Bucknor though, why? Guy is nothing special and would only be acceptable as a starter if we were using the ratio flexibility better, but the same could be said of Picard or Neufeld or even JFG (though I still say he's better than Bucknor, but also used more sparingly as well given the teams desire to bring in a FB for some plays)