17to85

A lot of Lawless type stuff where he takes his opinion and states it as fact. Threw Durant under the bus pretty good saying he was physically ready to play but chickened out and screwed the riders over in the process. I didn't pay too much attention but it was something like that. Guy is in love with his own bizarre ideas.

and against BC at home the defense gave the team chance after chance after chance but the offense failed to capitalize. Against Hamilton at home the defense kept them in the entire game and the offense pissed the chance to win away at the end of the game. The D did more to keep the team in games in the back half of the season than the offense did and that's just a fact.

It's OK, Durant is back next week, turnaround starts next week...

First I heard that. Do you have a link? Love to read it. He was blathering on about it in the TSN pregame show.

Maybe Walters should as their GM about getting some defensive linemen

Your post makes no sense. How do you get 7 good NI starters if you don't take the best player available (with consideration to availability around the NFL factored in)? Having a bunch of OL who might be ready to play in 2-3 years won't help us. Gotta draft and develop those mid-round guys into being players. How many 1st round picks on Calgary's OL or Saskatchewan's? We desperately need players who can play now regardless of position. Draft 1 OL with the first overall and pencil him in as a 2nd year starter. Draft 1 OL later in the draft and HOPE he will eventually turn into something down the line. Use the mid-rounds to bolster the rest of the NI roster. Gotta use your top picks to upgrade where you need to and for the Bombers, that's O lineman. So in 2011 we take MItchell first overall and Swiston later and hope he turns out.... how would that have worked out for this teams offensive line? Your idea is ridiculous as JBR has explained. When you are weak in all areas when it comes to NI depth you don't get picky. You take the best guy available.

Someone is going to pay the price for this for BC, just no way a team can so completely get its ass kicked in the playoffs like that and now have someone made an example of. Total team pants shitting there.

Because next season the Bombers are going to still be looking at 2 americans 3 canadians on the offensive line, for that group to get better it's primarily the americans who need to be better. So take the best NI in the draft so we can get another starter somewhere. Hell if we're picking by need for NIs I say we need a defensive lineman more than we need an offensive lineman given the current configuration of the team and where NIs play.

one leads to the other. When the offense can't stay on the field and put some points up you leave the defense in the position where they get worn down being on the field too much and momentum just builds and builds and builds against you. Any team that has an offense playing that badly is going to look poor on D because they just get worn down.

when bad Glenn shows up it's a long day for your team no doubt about it.

should you not build a base by taking the most talent and then building around them? If for example this team uses 3 NIs at receiver then we can play 3 americans on the OL quite easily. This idea that you MUST have 4 or 5 canadians on the OL is outdated thinking and needs to end.

you know I think I'd be more worried about Rider win today if they had lost the last game against Edmonton. It serves as a good wake up call to the esks that they can't take them lightly. Unless you're the Bombers it's not likely to lose back to back games to the same team. I'd heavily favour BC in the east except for the fact that crossover teams don't often seem to win.

well there's no Peaches playing on that defensive line either... seriously the CFL isn't complicated. good DL play = good defense, poor DL play = bad defense. Swap DLs with Edmonton and Winnipeg I guarantee that Chris Jones D isn't so fearsome.

Take the best player. The "we need an OL too badly" would have landed the team Mitchell instead of Muamba a few years ago and how would that have worked out? If the receiver is the best guy available take him! With Watson not being all that durable a more explosive NI receiver would be a good option for this team to be developing.

wild hurt for a couple games, Anderson lost for the season, vega playing injury all year...can you think of a defence that would be successful with as poor a defensive line as the Bombers had this year?Don't forget, sears, sherman, washington, kuale, newman, johnson, fraser....all players who missed some time if not the entire season. I think there may be a couple more but I can't remember.I think the debate on Etch is was the failure of the D in the second half of the season due to 1) rest of the league figured out his schemes or 2) injuries.In my opinion it's more a systemic problem with the schemes. option 3: offense couldn't stay on the field and the defence predictably gave up more yards as a result. Excuses. Like I said earlier, all teams deal with injuries. You can only use that crutch for so long. You think MOS used injuries as an excuse when they lost? I never heard any of that. Just that they have to play better. So, if the players don't get off easy then why should any of the coaches? Dude read the whole chain of comments, guy I was quoting talked about injuries being an excuse for the offense and asked for excuses from the defense, I gave him some injury excuses for the D too. Seriously you have hated the Etch hire since day 1, you are very very biased on this subject. I didn't want him hired either and he's not my ideal defensive coordinator either but come on, at least acknowledge that the defense did a decent job this year, especially considering how weak the defensive line was. I don't know a single defense that does any better than our did when it lacks talent on the defensive line. If you turn around and try and blame Etch for the DL being bad I'm going to die of laughter by the way.

wild hurt for a couple games, Anderson lost for the season, vega playing injury all year...can you think of a defence that would be successful with as poor a defensive line as the Bombers had this year?Don't forget, sears, sherman, washington, kuale, newman, johnson, fraser....all players who missed some time if not the entire season. I think there may be a couple more but I can't remember.I think the debate on Etch is was the failure of the D in the second half of the season due to 1) rest of the league figured out his schemes or 2) injuries.In my opinion it's more a systemic problem with the schemes. option 3: offense couldn't stay on the field and the defence predictably gave up more yards as a result.

wild hurt for a couple games, Anderson lost for the season, vega playing injury all year...can you think of a defence that would be successful with as poor a defensive line as the Bombers had this year?

Haha Gary Lawless is a *****. Why? And your reasons can't involve "fat" or "bald". Because the offense was a far bigger reason for the wins falling off.... and special teams giving up as many return tds as they did were more of a problem than the defense as well. I have pointed out in other thread there were maybe only 3 games where the defense didn't give the team a chance to win. stating that the defense was likely the biggest reason for the wins going away = straight up ********.

Haha Gary Lawless is a *****.

yeah the TFSA is a great savings tool. I hate that banks are always trying to push people into just using it as a savings account, such a waste, the true potential of a TFSA is to invest in something long term with good growth potential. Better than an RRSP for savings, everyone should be taking advantage of it.

which is of course the reason you were at the 2009 Grey Cup in Calgary right?

and with the riders being eliminated this weekend it's perfect because no one can call them on their bullshit this time. "Oh yeah he totally would have played if we could have won this week"

No this isn't what it is at all, this is Mike and I and some others trying to explain that the defense wasn't as bad as some of you want to pretend it was. Stay or go with Etch I don't care, I'll trust O'Shea to make the choice he wants. If Etch is back though (which he probably will be) it's not the disaster that some of you want to pretend it is because the defense for all it's unconventionality was not really a problem this season. Now you're doing it Dave. The defense got worse as the season went on, it became susceptible to the pass because the secondary was being asked to stop the run, it was giving up big plays on the ground and now through the air, it was swiss cheese for any team, even the vaunted offense of the ORB's. But it really wasn't a problem. No it wasn't a problem. The offense was the biggest problem in the back half of the year, except as I mentioned those couple of games. Redblacks and Eskimos being a couple of them. But a big part of those losses was also the offenses inability to do anything. The last 2 BC games any kind of offensive production they can win. Against Hamilton the D kept them in that game and all the offense had to do was score that damned TD late. Defense kept them in the games against the stamps for the most part. A lot of you are trying to make believe pretty hard that the defense was a problem because it fits your preconceived notions about Etchevary. Offense was down right across the league, defense was winning games for virtually everyone. Could our offense have been better, absolutely, and if they were we probably do win more games but that's not what happened. What happened was games became defensive battles and when push came to shove, we got it shoved down our throat. Except the defense didn't really drop off much as the year went on, the only thing that dropped off for the Bombers was the offense. That is the difference. They kept going 2 and out and the defense kept getting left on the field, that breaks any defense.

but but but Flutie had the same injury and came back! I was assured that Taman had no reason to lie! what gives? I almost wish the rider ******* were here to swallow their crow... almost.

No this isn't what it is at all, this is Mike and I and some others trying to explain that the defense wasn't as bad as some of you want to pretend it was. Stay or go with Etch I don't care, I'll trust O'Shea to make the choice he wants. If Etch is back though (which he probably will be) it's not the disaster that some of you want to pretend it is because the defense for all it's unconventionality was not really a problem this season. Now you're doing it Dave. The defense got worse as the season went on, it became susceptible to the pass because the secondary was being asked to stop the run, it was giving up big plays on the ground and now through the air, it was swiss cheese for any team, even the vaunted offense of the ORB's. But it really wasn't a problem. No it wasn't a problem. The offense was the biggest problem in the back half of the year, except as I mentioned those couple of games. Redblacks and Eskimos being a couple of them. But a big part of those losses was also the offenses inability to do anything. The last 2 BC games any kind of offensive production they can win. Against Hamilton the D kept them in that game and all the offense had to do was score that damned TD late. Defense kept them in the games against the stamps for the most part. A lot of you are trying to make believe pretty hard that the defense was a problem because it fits your preconceived notions about Etchevary.