17to85

Much more then Goltz, Elliott, Hall, Brink, Boltus, Dinwiddie had combined...... and yet mos of those qbs were better players than Bishop.

Dave Ritchie full stop.

So you're in favour of cutting a guy just because he didn't sign a contract extension?Pay no mind to him, he hitched his fan wagon to Portis a while back and wants to be vindicated for that it seems.I said Portis looked good in a couple practices. I haven't hitched my wagon to anyone. Where do you guys come up with these assumptions??I've explained my logic here. Not saying Marve will be cut, but there's a strong case to support that decision. There isn't a strong case and it simply comes across as you trying to justify your ideas that Portis should be #3. There is a strong case and you are 100% wrong with your accusations. I couldn't care less who wins 3rd string QB. Only in your mind.

So you're in favour of cutting a guy just because he didn't sign a contract extension? Pay no mind to him, he hitched his fan wagon to Portis a while back and wants to be vindicated for that it seems.I said Portis looked good in a couple practices. I haven't hitched my wagon to anyone. Where do you guys come up with these assumptions??I've explained my logic here. Not saying Marve will be cut, but there's a strong case to support that decision. There isn't a strong case and it simply comes across as you trying to justify your ideas that Portis should be #3.

Bishop threw the ball deep and eventually someone caught it for a big play. Guy was a terrible qb I don't care how many ill gotten wins he had.

why do you get 2 points on a safety? Why 3 when you kick the ball through the uprights? Why 6 when you advance the ball into the endzone? Because it's in the rules that's why. You shouldn't get a point for missing a field goal, but yes a rule is a rule. It's not a point for missing a field goal, it a point for kicking a ball into the endzone and preventing the other team from returning it out of the endzone.Then give a point on turnovers in the end zone. More excitement! well if you get a turnover in the endzone I believe they give you 6 points for it.

Yantz isn't going anywhere. What are basing that opinion on? Yantz wasn't even taken to the first preseason game when he was most likely to get some reps. I doubt we see him in the 2nd preseason game either. PR because he's a Canuck? Contract status obviously!

So you're in favour of cutting a guy just because he didn't sign a contract extension? Pay no mind to him, he hitched his fan wagon to Portis a while back and wants to be vindicated for that it seems.

when was the last time a football team made roster decisions at qb based on who has a contract going past this season or not? Honestly the **** some of you people worry about is enough to make me want to slam my head through a wall. Marve is a better qb than Portis and if they decide to keep Portis just because he's got a longer contract then fire Kyle Walters right this instant.

because he would have to care about the CFL first and he just flat out doesn't give a damn about the league. Our frustration should really be directed towards the Free Press for giving the beat to someone who openly doesn't give a damn about the CFL. One of the things that made Ed Tait so good at it was that he actually liked football and the CFL.

why do you get 2 points on a safety? Why 3 when you kick the ball through the uprights? Why 6 when you advance the ball into the endzone? Because it's in the rules that's why. You shouldn't get a point for missing a field goal, but yes a rule is a rule. It's not a point for missing a field goal, it a point for kicking a ball into the endzone and preventing the other team from returning it out of the endzone.

Why on earth would he extend his contract as a third stringer before he has a chance to move up the depth chart or not?

why do you get 2 points on a safety? Why 3 when you kick the ball through the uprights? Why 6 when you advance the ball into the endzone? Because it's in the rules that's why.

Damage control, perhaps? More likely "can you believe what the stupid people on the internet are saying? Let's put that to rest"

There you go, crisis averted. Next time people should just listen when I tell them they're worrying about nothing, save everyone some grief.

It bugs me even if in jest when people talk about not understanding single points. It's a really ******* simple rule. Kicked ball goes through the endzone or the returner is downed in the endzone it's 1 point. Not rocket surgery there.

I'd be happy if they stopped feeding us the BS about listening to the fans when they come up with the disgusting looks they have come up with recently.

That's a shame, would have liked to see other teams keep crappy players around.

you really think sneaking on 3rd and short does much to develop a guy?

That would be a mistake cause Portis stinks.Stinks as a 3rd Stringer though? I don't think so. Anyone else we bring in as the #3 wouldn't know the playbook or personnel as well as Portis.So what's wrong with keeping all 4 qbs around this year and in the event that Marve does go in the offseason you still have Portis around for the following season while keeping your 3 best qbs this year. Injuries happen in the CFL, we've gone 3 qbs deep on the depth chart a lot in the last few years.The thinking is that they'd want to develop Portis more this year since you know he'll be around next year, meaning he'd be 3rd QB. Would Marve accept a reduced role this year?They'd both be doing their developing in practise more than anything, I don't see any issues. I think people are really just trying to find something to worry about with the qb position. Writing off guys as gone before the opening kick off in game 1, for **** sakes guys let's settle down a little.There's a lot more development going on when a QB gets to play in actual games. And since 1/2 is Willy/Brohm neither one of Marve or Portis is likely to get a lot of playing time anyway so my point still stands.

O'Shea did say he should have tried more 2 pointers post game so there's that.

That would be a mistake cause Portis stinks. Stinks as a 3rd Stringer though? I don't think so. Anyone else we bring in as the #3 wouldn't know the playbook or personnel as well as Portis. So what's wrong with keeping all 4 qbs around this year and in the event that Marve does go in the offseason you still have Portis around for the following season while keeping your 3 best qbs this year. Injuries happen in the CFL, we've gone 3 qbs deep on the depth chart a lot in the last few years.The thinking is that they'd want to develop Portis more this year since you know he'll be around next year, meaning he'd be 3rd QB. Would Marve accept a reduced role this year? They'd both be doing their developing in practise more than anything, I don't see any issues. I think people are really just trying to find something to worry about with the qb position. Writing off guys as gone before the opening kick off in game 1, for **** sakes guys let's settle down a little.

That would be a mistake cause Portis stinks. Stinks as a 3rd Stringer though? I don't think so. Anyone else we bring in as the #3 wouldn't know the playbook or personnel as well as Portis. So what's wrong with keeping all 4 qbs around this year and in the event that Marve does go in the offseason you still have Portis around for the following season while keeping your 3 best qbs this year. Injuries happen in the CFL, we've gone 3 qbs deep on the depth chart a lot in the last few years.

That would be a mistake cause Portis stinks.

And others are acting like Marve should be considered the starter for the Bombers now. My point is simply: A) the noise out of camp from the media is that Brohm is the clear #2, both in how he's performed (although some posters here see things quite differently from their viewpoint at practice - I'm not going to say which assessment is the more accurate one), and in what the intentions of the coaching staff are (at least how the media have portrayed it so far), so Marve is at best the #3, which usually is reserved for a developmental future project and not a player intended to supplant the current starter by week 9, and whether or not he fails in the NFL, his intention NOW is that he doesn't want to stay and play in Winnipeg, even though his contract says he can't go anywhere else for this year, so one has to wonder if that lack of desire to be here will keep him from wanting to return to Winnipeg as a free agent after a failed NFL run. I have little faith that Marve will score an NFL spot, but if his attitude is that the Bombers are not his priority, why keep him holding a clipboard this year over a QB who will be invested in growing his game with the team beyond this season? Your opinion is bad and you should feel bad. Every player on that roster at one point had NFL dreams. Nothing says Marve isn't committed to Winnipeg if the NFL dream dies. Worrying about nothing. If he's the 3rd best qb (to me he appears much better than Portis) so keep him on the roster and trust you can convince him that Winnipeg is the best place to be on his next contract.