17to85

Durant is totally important. He is a warrior and one of the top two or three qbs in the CFL and there is nobody I would rather have leading the Riders into the playoffs. Why does that mean that Sunseri sucks? Nobody is saying Sunseri sucks. You should learn to identify a middle ground. In his snaps that he has played Sunseri has shown potential to be a solid CFL quarterback. He looked good against BC and not so good against the Bombers. Difference? The Riders had a big lead on the Bombers so they went into a conservative mode. Against BC Sunseri actually led the Riders to a victory. Maybe I'm wrong and Sunseri will suck but I'm cautiously optimistic he'll do a good job. I think you guys would feel the same in the same situation, what? they threw the ball downfield more with Sunseri in the game than they did with Durant in the game, and Sunseri didn't hit his receivers. That's a bullshit argument to even try and make. So he didn't lead the Riders to a win over the Lions or you are talking about the Bomber game? The bolded is what I'm talking about. They didn't go any more conservative against Winnipeg, I would even say they got more aggressive because they actually took shots down field with him when the most Durant did in the game was a few passes to Dressler. Durants passes were on target though and worked whereas Sunseri didn't complete his passes and led his offense off the field. So don't give me that crap about them going conservative. They went "conservative" because that's all they could bloody do.

Durant is totally important. He is a warrior and one of the top two or three qbs in the CFL and there is nobody I would rather have leading the Riders into the playoffs. Why does that mean that Sunseri sucks? Nobody is saying Sunseri sucks. You should learn to identify a middle ground. In his snaps that he has played Sunseri has shown potential to be a solid CFL quarterback. He looked good against BC and not so good against the Bombers. Difference? The Riders had a big lead on the Bombers so they went into a conservative mode. Against BC Sunseri actually led the Riders to a victory. Maybe I'm wrong and Sunseri will suck but I'm cautiously optimistic he'll do a good job. I think you guys would feel the same in the same situation, what? they threw the ball downfield more with Sunseri in the game than they did with Durant in the game, and Sunseri didn't hit his receivers. That's a bullshit argument to even try and make.

The Riders have been winning because they've been avoiding turnovers and generating a bunch themselves... let's see if a wet behind the ears qb can avoid turnovers as well, somehow I doubt they will be able to.

I am not asking for major player changes, I'm asking for a guy who can push Romby Bryant as our depth receiver, I'm asking for a defensive end who can make it so that playing a hurt Vega all year isn't the best option. I wand a backup linebacker who can push the useless Kuale to the bench. The fact that the offseason recruiting didn't pick up these things is a concern. Your depth should be the guys you recruit each year and we didn't do a good enough job. Most of the key pickups were CFL experienced guys, which is great but if you don't supplement them with your own import talent you're going to be hit harder by injuries.

Speaking of fallacies, I never blamed the refs I simply stated the obvious. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your desire to argue ANY point. so then why are you arguing with me about the refs?

This statement is probably the worst statement out of the entire thread; it really proves what kind of person you are. I'll repeat just because someone disagree's with your opinion, remember it is an opinion in the end and there is no such thing as a wrong or right opinion, doesn't mean it is as you would call it, stupid. Speaking of stupid ****..... That's the single biggest problem with the world today, people actually believe that nonsense. Just because you have an opinion means it can't be wrong? **** right off, there are lots of wrong opinions out there. Everyone is entitled to their opinions that much is true, but that doesn't make every opinion valid and I am entitled to tell people when their opinions are wrong.

but the only game it really was an issue as you said, was the Labour Day game where the Riders offense did march down field late to score. The first game in Winnipeg even with Messam running the Riders didn't generate **** for points and needed the turnovers from Winnipeg to get their points. Same deal in the Banjo Bowl. They needed the 2 majors from special teams to be able to win because for all the running the Riders did it didn't amount to much of anything on the score board. It didn't get them a win in the TOP battle so don't bring up this idea that they controlled the game either. It's good for the Riders that they took more advantage of the Bomber turnovers than the Bombers did the few turnovers that the Riders committed, but to suggest that the offense had any impact other than simply not turning the ball over too much is just making **** up. First game your defense won plain and simple, banjo bowl turned on special teams and only special teams. Running the ball doesn't mean a damn thing if your offense can't generate points on it's own. the Bombers were sloppy protecting the football and on special teams and it cost them 2 games they probably should have won, that's nothing to do with the Riders offense and if you are happy hoping that your D or special teams can out score opponents then keep on keeping on, I look forward to seeing the RIders and Esks games, it'll be fun to see if either team can outscore their respective Ds compared to their Os.

You are completely wrong. Look at where the Riders points came from in both games in Winnipeg. Offence didn't put up enough points in the first game and gave up 2 direct TDs, special teams did the same yesterday. If the O and ST don't hand the Riders points, both games in Winnipeg are easy Bomber wins even with 200 rushing yards against. When a team has a big lead their approach to the game changes. The only number that matters is the final score. But that big lead didn't come from the Riders offense, it came from special teams.... The Bombers won the battle on offense and defense yesterday, they just lost the special teams battle in a very lopsided manner. A win is a win, but when dissecting why a loss was a loss you can delve deeper into it than simply the final score. Let me ask you this, as a Rider fan were you pleased with the way the Riders offense played? Yes. Why? Because they controlled the game on the ground and protected the lead in the second half even while losing their starting QB (who was 8 for 9 passing at that point). but they didn't protect the lead... the lead kept shrinking on them in the 2nd half and the only reason they had the lead to start with was because of the special teams plays... I'll point it out again, the Riders offense twice had chances to make first downs late to take time off the clock and twice they failed to do so giving the Bombers chances to win the game again. The Riders defense did more to keep the lead than the offense did. You are looking at the offense from the standpoint of "we won so it all worked out" which is flawed. You have to ignore the final score to properly look at how things went. That is not quite true. On the second try they had gained the first down but fumbled the ball. which is still failing to do what they had to do...

the fact that you don't even mention the fact that Moore has missed what it is? 4 of the 11 games the team has played is exactly why I treat your opinions the way I do. It's a big ******* deal AND his presence in the line up simply makes the other receivers, especially Denmark more of a threat because there is less focus on them.That alone is a big factor. I like Denmark, always have because he's a guy with good hands and a good ability to hurt opposing teams in a variety of way, but he's not suited to being the only guy on the team who can do that. Moore can open up things for him and allow him to be the supporting guy. Cory Watson is pretty solid at doing multiple things out there as well but with him missing a bunch of time as well it's hard to rely on him. Kelly is too inconsistent. He's really shown up for about 3 games, the first one against Toronto, the Hamilton game and then last game, other than that he's been very very pedestrian. I want a guy who can be a threat every game. Kohlert and JFG I like but they are what they are, they're more of the possession guys who will make some catches for you but can't be relied upon to get open consistently. It really comes down to the fact that Moore is the only one on the team who can be relied upon in the #1 slot to consistently get open and catch the ball. Yeah the fumbles are not good, but he brings enough to the team that he is a big positive regardless of that and trying to just bring up the receiving numbers is pretty pointless. Let's look at it this way, haven't we only won one game that he didn't dress for? So unless I'm forgetting games he missed we'd be 1-3 without Moore in the lineup and 5-2 with him in the lineup... Now I'm not saying that's all because of Moore but it's as relevant a stat to bring up as the total receiving yards.

Honestly the biggest thing the Bombers are lacking is depth. Just can't really over come the injuries as some other teams because there are some areas that are real thin.

If people stop saying stupid **** I'll stop telling them they're saying stupid **** it's as simple as that.

Thank god you aren't the GM. That receiving corps has a real lack of play makers. Too many one dimensional guys. Moore despite the fumbles is a multi faceted receiver and the best guy on the team AINEC.

The competition at defensive line and receiver was abysmal, arguably two of the easier spots to find players along with running back. I'm fine with giving a pass on finding Canadians, that takes time, but literally no one was found at receiver and one guy was found at DL, a guy who has been pretty marginal. Mack found Jeffers-Harris, Carr, Denmark and Matthews in his first 3 seasons, Hopkins, Turner, Vega, Hall, hell even a guy like Kenny Mainor. Yes exactly, in his first three seasons as you said. Walters has had one offseason. On top of that, I'm sorry but if we're calling guys like TJH, Carr, and Mainor finds then we must be pretty desperate. They were guys who showed flashes here and there who left fans wanting more but were unable to deliver. There's a reason those players are no longer in the CFL. Out of all those guys you mentioned, Denmark (who many people were content to let walk last year), Turner, and Vega are the only guys I'd consider finds. Matthews had one good season, and an awful second one, who even when healthy seemed to struggle making the easiest of catches, and if Hall was as special as we like to make him out to be, he'd have a job by now as well. Yes he's a good pure pass rusher, but he's not fundamentally sound as an all round defensive end. The point is that all of them were better than the people Walters brought in this year. Most of Walters additions have been guys who have been around the CFL before. I am willing to give them a mulligan on this year as they transition to a new scouting staff, but to have success in the CFL you need to be able to bring up contributing players from the states and this year has been underwhelming.

but if you paid attention to anything I wrote you'd know that I never said the refs were good... just that blaming them for losses is a ridiculous fallacy. So any time you want feel free to join me here in the real world rather than the one that exists only in your head.

Explain to me why we need to replace Bryant when he's in the midst of his best season ever. now it occurs to me that maybe you mean Romby Bryant not bryant turner, in which case, i'm an idiot never mind me. Yes I should have been more clear. I meant Romby. I think he is finished and really hope that Matthews decides to return to the bombers. yeah I was only half paying attention to what I was reading here and all the talk was about Bilukidi who is a DL and I just made the connection to Bryant Turner. It's my bad for not paying attention

Explain to me why we need to replace Bryant when he's in the midst of his best season ever. now it occurs to me that maybe you mean Romby Bryant not bryant turner, in which case, i'm an idiot never mind me.

IF you tackle the guy before he's already returned the ball to midfield the holding never has a chance to happen... When you let a returner get to the point where there's only one guy with a chance of stopping him you've failed in your coverage a long time before. That's absolutely true, but it doesn't mean there wasn't a hold and that it shouldn't have been called. yeah but when the coaches break down the film you think they will say to the team "OK it's not your fault, the refs just missed the holding"? What they're going to do are highlight the guys who didn't contain the returner initially because that's where the biggest mistake on the play came in. I really don't see how the 2 things are related. Of course the coaches will use the film to illustrate where the play broke down and point out the errors, so they can be corrected. That's their job and it's the players job to execute. Just like the refs blew a call that it is their job to make.... But I doubt they will be looking at film to see where they failed. Two seperate things: The Bombers failed to keep their lanes and make a tackle and the refs missed an obvious hold. The point is, that if you are play well and take care of your own play and don't make mistakes then the refs don't come into play at all. What planet are you on? I want to move there. Earth you should join me sometime, I'd be a lot less angry if more people lived in reality.

honestly my problem with the media are guys like Weicek who have flat out stated they don't really like the CFL. How can this guy be taken seriously when he admits he doesn't understand the league? Then there are columnists who are more interested in being famous for stirring **** up than actually addressing real issues and it's easy to see why fans grow tired of the media coverage this team gets. No one ever complained about Ed Tait or Randy Turner because those guys did their jobs well. The new bunch though leave much to be desired.

that particular word is so strange to me... it's the most offensive racial slur you can possibly use... yet the people it's supposed to be disparaging against seem to freely use it themselves all the time. What gives? If you want that word to be a bad word then stop ******* using it yourselves!

The crazy thing is that Willy still put up 360 yards with such an underwhelming receiving crew. And he spread the ball around really well, he was doing a great job at finding the open man.Call me crazy but after ten weeks I think the guy is the best QB we've had here since Dunigan. He's doing a great job with far less support than Khari had. He's leading the league in passing yardage (and yeah I know everyone else has a game in hand but he's got a healthy 350-400 yard lead over his competition, so it's not a phony stat.) He's the best we've had since Khari. I've said before that I really wished Willy had the same kind of weapons Khari had because I think they could do a lot of the same kind of things. Let's not downplay what Khari was able to do ok, because he did some amazing things here.

IF you tackle the guy before he's already returned the ball to midfield the holding never has a chance to happen... When you let a returner get to the point where there's only one guy with a chance of stopping him you've failed in your coverage a long time before. That's absolutely true, but it doesn't mean there wasn't a hold and that it shouldn't have been called. yeah but when the coaches break down the film you think they will say to the team "OK it's not your fault, the refs just missed the holding"? What they're going to do are highlight the guys who didn't contain the returner initially because that's where the biggest mistake on the play came in. I really don't see how the 2 things are related. Of course the coaches will use the film to illustrate where the play broke down and point out the errors, so they can be corrected. That's their job and it's the players job to execute. Just like the refs blew a call that it is their job to make.... But I doubt they will be looking at film to see where they failed. Two seperate things: The Bombers failed to keep their lanes and make a tackle and the refs missed an obvious hold. The point is, that if you are play well and take care of your own play and don't make mistakes then the refs don't come into play at all.

This is what happens when you neglect your depth at one position and have to play an already injured player. Thankfully they picked up a guy in trade but how did we go over half the season without addressing the depth at this position? Kyle Walters has done some good things, but he has neglected some aspects of his job. The depth we have at DL and receiver in particular is alarmingly bad.

You are completely wrong. Look at where the Riders points came from in both games in Winnipeg. Offence didn't put up enough points in the first game and gave up 2 direct TDs, special teams did the same yesterday. If the O and ST don't hand the Riders points, both games in Winnipeg are easy Bomber wins even with 200 rushing yards against. When a team has a big lead their approach to the game changes. The only number that matters is the final score. But that big lead didn't come from the Riders offense, it came from special teams.... The Bombers won the battle on offense and defense yesterday, they just lost the special teams battle in a very lopsided manner. A win is a win, but when dissecting why a loss was a loss you can delve deeper into it than simply the final score. Let me ask you this, as a Rider fan were you pleased with the way the Riders offense played? Yes. Why? Because they controlled the game on the ground and protected the lead in the second half even while losing their starting QB (who was 8 for 9 passing at that point). but they didn't protect the lead... the lead kept shrinking on them in the 2nd half and the only reason they had the lead to start with was because of the special teams plays... I'll point it out again, the Riders offense twice had chances to make first downs late to take time off the clock and twice they failed to do so giving the Bombers chances to win the game again. The Riders defense did more to keep the lead than the offense did. You are looking at the offense from the standpoint of "we won so it all worked out" which is flawed. You have to ignore the final score to properly look at how things went.

IF you tackle the guy before he's already returned the ball to midfield the holding never has a chance to happen... When you let a returner get to the point where there's only one guy with a chance of stopping him you've failed in your coverage a long time before. That's absolutely true, but it doesn't mean there wasn't a hold and that it shouldn't have been called. yeah but when the coaches break down the film you think they will say to the team "OK it's not your fault, the refs just missed the holding"? What they're going to do are highlight the guys who didn't contain the returner initially because that's where the biggest mistake on the play came in.

I would still like a more consistent running back but Grigsby has been getting better lately and with Moore I think the receivers are passable but without him I don't like them much at all. Replace Kelly with someone who is going to be a threat every game and get some better depth otherwise and I probably do like them a lot.