17to85
-
Posts
21,569 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
198
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by 17to85
-
-
because no one cares about Vancouver or Ottawa. Seriously two of the shittiest all time franchises ever. At least Edmonton had their glory years and Calgary even had one cup in their history. Neither team in this one has ever won **** and no one cares about them at all.I don't think many people outside of Vancouver really cared.
They care about the Canucks here in BC when they are winning. Suddenly everyone is on the bandwagon, which is really sad to see. Canucks fans are the biggest band-wagon jumpers in Canada, and the biggest ******-bags. I witnessed a verbal sparring match between some Canucks and Oiler fans last year at a game, the Canucks fans were ribbing the Oiler fans and telling them how bad they sucked, and the Oiler fans just responded with "how many Cups you guys got? Oh yeah you're the 42 year old virgins".
The only claim to fame the Canucks have is almost winning a cup... but both Calgary and Edmonton pulled that off in the last decade as well. Gillis is on his way to ******* up that team so it won't be long until they're re-acquainted with the bottom of the standings. So annoying when they try and trash talk anyone.
-
I think the MD hate mostly comes from his line on why he took Kolhert, "take a look at there roster," since he was a FA. Although many agree he was probably right you are not going to allow an outsider to take pot shots.
Nah the guy was a goof before that. Some of us remember all the hype he went to Hamilton with and that team sucked then. The only good thing he did in Hamilton was sign Printers to that monstrosity of a contract which prevented Taman from getting him.
-
I don't think many people outside of Vancouver really cared.
because no one cares about Vancouver or Ottawa. Seriously two of the shittiest all time franchises ever. At least Edmonton had their glory years and Calgary even had one cup in their history. Neither team in this one has ever won **** and no one cares about them at all.
-
To be quite honest I'd rather see the players getting a bigger share than the owners simply taking a bigger cut. Why do they need to buy more ivory back scratchers while the players kill themselves.
-
Morris is the biggest douchebag going. He's got a giant ego on him and thinks he's better than he is.
-
Morris is a very good player but not as a skip. he is impatient, Has a temper & isn't the easiest guy to get along with when his team isn't playing well. if they're something like 2-3 out of the gates, he'll implode. Kevin Coe is a very good curler. Already won the Brier. He'll be tough as will Stoughton. I thought Brad Jacobs got hot at the right time last year when he won the Brier & really wasn't that strong a team. Wow, was I wrong. If he was in this year's Brier, he'd win it no doubt. Too bad the Men don't have Team Canada like the Women..
Team Canada is coming to next years Brier I believe, as well as many other changes. There is going to be a relegation and the free ride for teams from a lot of the maritime provinces is going to end. There is much debate about whether it's a good change or not, I personally think it is a good change. Looking at the lineup of teams this year you basically have 3 teams with a shot of winning, Stoughton, Koe and Morris. The rest of them are also rans, and yes that includes Brad Gushue.
Jacobs team is an interesting one, inconsistency is really their big weakness at this point but based on the Brier and Trials maybe they've outgrown those problems. Will be worth watching to see how they do going forward because we are likely to see a huge shift in the curling landscape next season. Lots of guys like Howard and Stoughton and even Martin might be retiring which opens up the field a ton, not to mention with the start of a new olympic cycle a lot of teams will be changing around.
-
Hopefully they can get something hammered out without too much drama. It's in everyone's best interest to do it quickly and painlessly. It's the one sport where I don't mind the players looking for more. They don't get paid millions and they still have to be as dedicated as any other pro athlete.
-
Mental illness is just an excuse. Yeah drugs can manage it, but if you stop taking the drugs you can go right back to being a crazy person and a danger to society. I'm all for greater awareness of mental problems and greater methods for spotting mental troubles early and helping people but that being said you show that you're crazy enough to behead someone and eat them sorry but you blew your chance at being part of a functioning society.
Generalization that is way off the mark. A lot of people who have been touched by mental health issues would take offense to this remark.
That's why we, as a collective group of people trying to co-exist with one another, rely on professionals (i.e Mark H's point) in these chosen vocations to apply their education, expertise, experiences and emotional intelligence to the most relevant information/evidence available. Usually no one case is identical to the other that warrants a particular decision for that situation. Yes, sometimes they get it right and sometimes they don't. That's true for any vocation. It's called the complexity of life.
Quite frankly I don't care if those people are offended. I see no reason to be PC about it. If you're crazy you're crazy why tip toe around it? Like I said I am all for mental health awareness and programs to help people and ending the nonsense that some problems you just have to suck up and deal with it... but once you cross the line from simply crazy to crazed killer I'm sorry but it's game over and I want that person out of society.
Yeah well, drunk people have also been known to do some crazy things, especially while behind the steering wheel.
but if you commit a crime while drunk you don't get to use the techinicality that you weren't in your right state of mind, you get held responsible for your actions.
Drunkeness can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter, which greatly shortens the sentence. When said person is released - there is no way to know if they'll reoffend or not.
yeah but murder vs. manslaughter is a legal terminology thing. Basically to commit muder you need to have intent, manslaughter is more of a "whoops killed someone" charge. For the record if a drunk driver kills someone I'm in favour of getting them out of society too. They too blew their chance.
-
Mental illness is just an excuse. Yeah drugs can manage it, but if you stop taking the drugs you can go right back to being a crazy person and a danger to society. I'm all for greater awareness of mental problems and greater methods for spotting mental troubles early and helping people but that being said you show that you're crazy enough to behead someone and eat them sorry but you blew your chance at being part of a functioning society.
Generalization that is way off the mark. A lot of people who have been touched by mental health issues would take offense to this remark.
That's why we, as a collective group of people trying to co-exist with one another, rely on professionals (i.e Mark H's point) in these chosen vocations to apply their education, expertise, experiences and emotional intelligence to the most relevant information/evidence available. Usually no one case is identical to the other that warrants a particular decision for that situation. Yes, sometimes they get it right and sometimes they don't. That's true for any vocation. It's called the complexity of life.
Quite frankly I don't care if those people are offended. I see no reason to be PC about it. If you're crazy you're crazy why tip toe around it? Like I said I am all for mental health awareness and programs to help people and ending the nonsense that some problems you just have to suck up and deal with it... but once you cross the line from simply crazy to crazed killer I'm sorry but it's game over and I want that person out of society.
Yeah well, drunk people have also been known to do some crazy things, especially while behind the steering wheel.
but if you commit a crime while drunk you don't get to use the techinicality that you weren't in your right state of mind, you get held responsible for your actions.
-
To me it's all about how those yards come. I'd rather a guy pick up 60 yards a game with a longest run being 15 yards than a guy picking up 60 yards when there's a 30 or 40 yard run in there. Just a preference on my part. Same reason I was less sold on Fred Reid compared with some people. Preference for someone who can grind it out at the position as opposed to the big play guy.
On short yardage too, you want someone who can tough out yards, especially close to the goal line. So many times last year we'd be 2nd-and-3, 2nd-and-2, we'd run against a stacked box and fail to convert.
Well I don't assign all the blame for that to the runningbacks though. The o-line still has to not let guys get a hit on the rb in the backfield and the playcalling might not want to telegraph it so much. The Bombers always ran on 2nd and short and the defense always knew it was coming and always made the stop.
-
I heard Gary on being interviewed by CJOB's Jim Toth the day after he was fired. He was gracious, classy & didn't have a bad word to say about the Bombers, the city or fans. He didn't have to come on the radio so my opinion of the man changed after hearing him. He truly was sorry he couldn't make things work as OC.
Yeah that was a really good interview he did, much respect for the guy handling that the way he did.
-
-
Mental illness is just an excuse. Yeah drugs can manage it, but if you stop taking the drugs you can go right back to being a crazy person and a danger to society. I'm all for greater awareness of mental problems and greater methods for spotting mental troubles early and helping people but that being said you show that you're crazy enough to behead someone and eat them sorry but you blew your chance at being part of a functioning society.
Generalization that is way off the mark. A lot of people who have been touched by mental health issues would take offense to this remark.
That's why we, as a collective group of people trying to co-exist with one another, rely on professionals (i.e Mark H's point) in these chosen vocations to apply their education, expertise, experiences and emotional intelligence to the most relevant information/evidence available. Usually no one case is identical to the other that warrants a particular decision for that situation. Yes, sometimes they get it right and sometimes they don't. That's true for any vocation. It's called the complexity of life.
Quite frankly I don't care if those people are offended. I see no reason to be PC about it. If you're crazy you're crazy why tip toe around it? Like I said I am all for mental health awareness and programs to help people and ending the nonsense that some problems you just have to suck up and deal with it... but once you cross the line from simply crazy to crazed killer I'm sorry but it's game over and I want that person out of society.
-
-
Agree with Brandon. Just to compare, Khari Jones was a leader on the field. Buck was not. My co-worker took him fishing and told me he was a really nice guy, which I believe. But a leader on the field. I just don't see it.
Completley disagree with this statement. Buck showed on and off the field needed leadership qualities for this team, especially the young guys. Things like loyalty, in-game coaching (whether playing or not) of his teammates, how he presented himself to the media, his honesty with his limitations and knowing it's negatively affecting his ability to be on the field consistently. Buck would be a great QB coach in my opinion.
Buck was a leader on the field when he first got here, but it didn't last too long just because he got so broken. I really don't think he was ever the same kind of player after he buggered up his elbow.
Yes but one of my points was you don't have to be playing to be a leader. His elbow issues, for example, didn't change how he demonstrated his off-field leadership qualities with his teammates, with the coaching staff, with management, with the fans.
But I think the only place he really was a leader was on the field playing his balls to the walls style. Much more of a lead by example type than a guy who could lead from the sidelines.
-
Mental illness is just an excuse. Yeah drugs can manage it, but if you stop taking the drugs you can go right back to being a crazy person and a danger to society. I'm all for greater awareness of mental problems and greater methods for spotting mental troubles early and helping people but that being said you show that you're crazy enough to behead someone and eat them sorry but you blew your chance at being part of a functioning society.
-
Agree with Brandon. Just to compare, Khari Jones was a leader on the field. Buck was not. My co-worker took him fishing and told me he was a really nice guy, which I believe. But a leader on the field. I just don't see it.
Completley disagree with this statement. Buck showed on and off the field needed leadership qualities for this team, especially the young guys. Things like loyalty, in-game coaching (whether playing or not) of his teammates, how he presented himself to the media, his honesty with his limitations and knowing it's negatively affecting his ability to be on the field consistently. Buck would be a great QB coach in my opinion.
Buck was a leader on the field when he first got here, but it didn't last too long just because he got so broken. I really don't think he was ever the same kind of player after he buggered up his elbow.
-
I was aware of the meme... I just thought that everyone agreed it was ******* ******** and it never got used... I was wrong.
-
Some food for thought regarding Will Ford, and I'm not advocating anything with this point other than it's just something to ponder, but in the nine games he started from the Banjo Bowl on, he averaged just over 62 yards rushing per game. While that doesn't sound like much, if you average that out over a full 18 games, that turns out to a season total of over 1100 yards rushing which would have been good enough for third in the league last year.
To me it's all about how those yards come. I'd rather a guy pick up 60 yards a game with a longest run being 15 yards than a guy picking up 60 yards when there's a 30 or 40 yard run in there. Just a preference on my part. Same reason I was less sold on Fred Reid compared with some people. Preference for someone who can grind it out at the position as opposed to the big play guy.
- BattleLevel, Logan007 and iso_55
-
3
-
I didn't see any problems in Suber's game when he lines up with, oh , say Jamel Richardson, a bigger, stronger receiver, who absolutely would get frustrated facing Suber.
And this right there is why people shouldn't worry about his size. Richardson is one of the biggest guys out there and Suber has a history of frustrating the hell out of him.
He'll always be at a disadvantage when it comes to jump balls on taller receivers but thus far it hasn't been much of an issue. Suber knows his strengths and weaknesses as a player and stays within himself and it works. He's not flashy but he is a damned good defensive back.
-
-
I like Suber and all, but no one can say that his height doesn't hinder him. Heck being that short hinders any DB.
We just can't have too many midgets back there.
being tall can also hinder a db because trust me, tall people in general don't have as much quickness as short players in general. It's just physics. I don't care how tall they are if they can cover. Sure all things being equal taller is better but if the short guy can cover then by all means play him. It just blows my mind how many people continually crap on Suber just because he's a shorter player, there have been a ton of great dbs in the CFL who are short.
-
I hope to not to have to see Suber in the starting line up ever again.
Yeah! No one likes having good players starting for us.
- Jimmy Pop, MOBomberFan and Noeller
-
3
-
What do I want the Bombers to do? Quit coming in second with so many free agents. I expected us to be way more aggressive than we have been. In the CFL, it's all about the money because no one makes multi million dollar guaranteed contracts. It's not like the NHL where players sign "Home Discounts" to stay with a team for less money than the open market because their contracts are already very high to begin with.
CFL players will go where the money is because they have such a short career span to play. If one team offers more $$ players usually go. I'm not talking five grand, I mean substantial like $10,000 or $20,000 a year or more. So, this talk about us offering players more money yet they won't sign here, I have a hard time believing it. Maybe the odd one like Burris who got the CFL equivalent of the moon but more than one player like Butler, Collaros & even maybe now McCune? I don't believe it. Like I said, I believe we have an idea of what we'll pay & won't go over that amount one cent. Last year we were substantially under the cap from what I read & where did that get us?
Playoff money my man, it matters to FAs in a lot of cases too. Yeah maybe Winnipeg and Hamilton offered the same money, but if you want to plan on getting some playoff money as well isn't Hamilton playing in a 4 team division with an expansion team more likely to hit the playoffs than Winnipeg in a 5 team and very tough western division? Until this franchise stabilizes itself you gotta expect free agents to be leery of coming here.
Vince Le To Get Unescorted Leaves
in General Discussion
Posted
For what it's worth, people who kill someone by driving drunk should get stiffer penalties too. This does boil down to philosophical differences in how the justice system should work though, it's unlikely that you'll change anyones mind.