[Jets vs Oilers Heritage Classic]

I know this will probably be an unpopular position, but I say good on them.

[Incident at Banjo Bowl]

1 minute ago, White Out said:

Sorry it just threw me. In one post the guy said his name wasn't "Rich" and then you used it directly to toast him. 

Np. It really irks me when people seem to be just looking for conflict (such as in most of this thread) and perhaps I shouldn't have taken your post as such.

I don't think it's my place to shed more light as I've been a lurker for most of my discussion board years but I will say he has become somewhat of a legendary poster going back to the early (some might argue golden) days of CFL discussion boards. Perhaps Iso can do the honour and provide some context for his post.

[Incident at Banjo Bowl]

9 minutes ago, White Out said:

? Is this a joke in poor taste or a typo?

Why on earth would you assume it's either? It's a toast to an old friend.

[Incident at Banjo Bowl]

12 minutes ago, White Out said:

lol, what? do you imagine me on vacation in Nova Scotia with a blackboard and a bunch of photographs joined by string? I simply put her story, according to her, in point form. No detective work needed... if you read the article, that's the story. Her story is ludicrous and doesn't pass the smell test. In my line of work I've come to have a very healthy skepticism for the incredible. Her story is utter nonsense. By the way i haven't even addressed the mental illness thing yet. You know whats worse for a child with mental illness, than losing their jacket? Having complete strangers yell at them and torment them. 

As I've stated before I have no doubt there was comments. I dont think this was conjured from pure thin air. But people embellish and lie on a daily basis. I don't know how you can think that's special.

Nope, I that's not how I imagine you and I think "the incredible" and "utter nonsense" is a massive exaggeration.

Skepticism is definitely healthy in a lot of contexts. Here, I just don't get the point.

Of course people embellish and lie of a daily basis, I'd didn't say or imply that I thought otherwise and I don't get your point in saying that. Again, I just don't see the benefit in being so critical of this story.

[Incident at Banjo Bowl]

1 minute ago, White Out said:

According to the Mom, this jacket would have been sopping wet from two people both pouring beer on it. That's why the jacket comes off. It's a beer soaked abuse magnet, according to the Mom. But nope, she's going to drag her 9 year old, in a smelly, beer soaked jacket that's the cause of all this abuse, and just run this gauntlet of abuse. This type of abuse that almost never occurs  in my experience and everyone else here, all in a span of 30 minutes. All these insane incidents of torment and cruelty, and callousness. 

How can people be so naive?

You're right, it almost never occurs. But this time it did, and that's a problem, a big problem.

I'm not going to sit here and read all of the stories and put together all the details so I can somehow disprove this kid's story, because, well, why would I want to do that?

What appears to be your worst case scenario: a kid and mom make up a story about being harassed to get some Bomber stuff. Honestly, I would rather be wrong in defending them and have this actually be the case then to be so jaded as to assume they're lying because their story isn't air tight. There's nothing naive about that.

[Incident at Banjo Bowl]

Why didn't the kid take off the jacket? BECAUSE THE KID SHOULDN'T HAVE TO. It doesn't matter what colour he was wearing, no kid deserves that.

And maybe it didn't happen exactly as reported and maybe the reports don't all corroborate. There's enough to say at least some approximation of what was reported occurred and that's too much. How you're trying to rationalize against the victim's story is what makes zero sense.

[Nichols vs Glenn]

Just now, 17to85 said:

Only because the turnovers have been avoided. Against teams that aren't the Riders it'll take more than just a couple drives a game to win because no other team gives games away like the Riders do. Nichols should be scoring more points with the way the defense was taking balls away. 

I would rather have poor O and great D than the other way around but when your O is that impotent you are playing with fire and sooner or later the D won't be able to bail them out. Gotta score some points sometimes. 

That's very true, Nichols and the O have done an excellent job of avoiding turnovers. Why does that have to be considered a streak, or at least any more than the "streak" the D has been on, with all the turnovers created?

I'm not arguing that we have a great offense, but we definitely have a good enough one that I don't think is playing above it's ability.

[Bombers Trade Willy for DB TJ Heath, Acquire Kevin Glenn]

Just now, kelownabomberfan said:

I wish Drew well, but he's got to get cured of the deer in headlights slow reaction time, or defenses are just going to play him the way they have played him all last year and the first few games of this year - blitz and make him either throw it away or take the sack.  Quick-draw McGraw Nichols has been winning because defenses aren't used to a quick release QB for Winnipeg, they haven't had to worry about it in years.

Agreed, and I think Milanovich is just the one to cure him.

[Nichols vs Glenn]

4 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

True but sometimes a streak is just a streak. 

Let's not pretend that ekeing out wins against the Riders is really acceptable. I mean that defense has been making teams look great all year and the Bombers had to fight tooth and nail to put drives together on them. That's a concern. Not like they beat a good team in tight games, it's the 1-10 Riders they barely hung on against. 

And I guess I disagree that this is just a streak. I don't think we've been winning in spite of Nichols and the offense, I think all three phases have been complementing each other quite well.

[Bombers Trade Willy for DB TJ Heath, Acquire Kevin Glenn]

1 minute ago, LimJahey said:

Why does it matter if he works out in TO? if he happens to work out there, great for him and their org. He was not working out here and we have chosen our guy. Unless we meet them in the cup or they cross over and beat us in the playoffs i'm fine if he does well there.

That's actually the point I was trying to make, that I don't think this trade should be based on how well he does in Toronto. Guaranteed, though, people will use his future performance to judge this trade.

[Nichols vs Glenn]

3 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Some of those lack of INT numbers for Nichols are luck whether flat out dropped by dbs or taken away on cheap PI calls. He's done well for sure but people trot out 6-0 and the TD:INT ratio entirely too quickly without providing context. 

Nichols is under our microscope so we see his near-misses more than any other QB's. There are near-misses by every QB.

[Bombers Trade Willy for DB TJ Heath, Acquire Kevin Glenn]

I think right now it looks like we fleeced the Argos but I think this will end up being win-win. I think Willy will end up flourishing in Toronto but I don't think it will be fair to look at his future performances and say look at what we lost. Drew Willy in Toronto will be a different - and I think better - QB than Drew Willy here and given that he was almost guaranteed to be gone next year for nothing I think a DB among the league leaders in ints and couple of picks is a remarkable haul. On the flip side, I can see the Argos saying our future starting QB for a couple of picks and an imp DB is a remarkable haul. So, win-win.

[Alberta Economy & Oil (Split Discussion)]

4 hours ago, Noeller said:

The water and (guessing here) the land north of, say, Dauphin (for arguments sake) isn't as conducive to growing as it is in Alberta, where there is great farmland all over the province. North of Winnipeg is good cattle country, for sure, but it's not a LOT of great crop land. Manitoba's crop land is mostly south of the #1......mostly..........

For sure. I live in Northern Alberta (about 3 hours S of the NWT border) and there is significant farming pretty much to the NWT border. 

[In Case You Missed It]

16 minutes ago, bearpants said:

 

I completely agree... this "insider statement" does not make any sense... he's basically saying "the Bomber are good but they're only good because they are playing well"... if the statement was the offense is good b/c they're getting help from the D and ST, then sure...

I think the point is not that they are playing well and getting the turnovers, it's that the turnovers seem to be coming at an unsustainable rate, which I think makes some sense. That being said, while I think our turnover rate will slow down (to a degree) the team is good enough to still be successful.

[Nicholls's Potential Bonus]

2 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

IR'ing Willy is only an advantage if he stays there longer than 6 weeks. If you 6 game Willy, he can't practice for 4 weeks. Davis takes over the #2 spot on the roster anyway. If Nichols gets hurt in the first 6 weeks, Davis goes into the game, you have no SMS advantage if you bring Willy back and Davis will have taken all the #2 reps.

Keeping Willy means we're paying about $200K for half a season of backup QB insurance that we hope we never need to use. If we do, we hope that he can find the game he had a couple of years back before all the injuries.

Exactly, Some people have argued that that is a bad idea and some people have argued that it isn't; personally I see merit in both sides and fall on the side that it is a good idea. I'm not going to elaborate as to why, because it seems at this point the arguments have been made and that aspect of this thread is just going in circles.

[Question about Rod Pederson vs other media]

1 minute ago, bearpants said:

I think it's pretty obvious why other guys are annoyed with him... The OP touched on it and 17to85 really brought it home there... it seems no one has a problem with him doing his thing... when he started calling out credible media personnel... they didn't sit idly by... 

I have no issue with a little bit of homerism on local broadcasts... CJOB radio is meant for Bomber fans... just as CK whatever is for Rider fans... I have never listened to a Riders radio broadcast so I can't speak to what he does there...  

For sure, it just seemed to really take off this year. I suppose he made the mistake of poking the bears.

[In Case You Missed It]

The D was definitely bad to start the year, but I think that motivation is a factor that has to be considered as well. Perhaps the stats won't back me up on this (I'm too lazy to check) but it at least seemed like the offense was punchless, which has to be demoralizing and exhausting for the D. I know they are pros, but they are also human, and it had to be hard to feel like a defensive stop actually wasn't going to mean much in the grand scheme of things. Lately, there is actually the possibility of the offensive scoring points, even touchdowns, and hitting back after a defensive stop. That has to effect their play in my opinion.

[Question about Rod Pederson vs other media]

15 hours ago, 17to85 said:

It's not about his biases or just general being shitty at his job that get the ire of other media members and cause them to call him out, it's when he questions the credibility of other people that gets them pissed off at him. He basically has the gall to tell other respected media people that they are hacks and are flat out making up reports. Damn right they're going to fire back at him for accusations like that. 

Thank you for bringing the discussion back to the original comment. I'm all for criticizing the guy in general, but that wasn't what this thread was about though that's what it has turned in to. The question was why such a feud between him and the journalists/reporters/columnists/whatever and I too am interested in why the relationship has changed so much this year. I mean, the guy has been a homer every year, why the hostility this year?

[Upcoming Movies]

On August 12, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Noeller said:

I just feel like all these "all female cast!!" movies are trying to hard to make some kind of political statement about how women can do things just as well as man, instead of concentrating on trying to make a good movie. I don't care who the hell is in the cast, so long as they're talented and the movie is top notch. By worrying about the sexism, etc., they're completely missing the point and wasting everyone's time.

I don't believe for a minute that their one and only priority is to make money, and so if they are making a political statement it's because they think that's what people want and will spend money on, not because of any principle. Whether or not they are right, well I guess we'll see. 

[OK, it IS Willy ...]

With respect to Willy keeping his helmet on: I brought this up yesterday and a friend said it's so he can hear the plays and follow along. Not sure if this is accurate but it makes sense to me. 

[Playing With Pokemans]

1 hour ago, Logan007 said:

Playing games with your kids is fine.  But no one is losing weight on this unless they are playing it ridiculously long.  Sorry.  There's more then just walking around a bit to help you lose weight.  You have to eat properly as well.  Also, the benefits of walking only work if you're are walking continuously, not stopping every 5 minutes to catch a Pokemon.

I'm not saying playing this game is all bad, I'm just saying that there isn't enough evidence to support everything people are touting.  I'm guessing most of the posts are BS of the health benefits.  I was a kid once too that use to play games, and I used to tell my mom BS answers too as to why I was playing for so long "oh it's so good for hand eye coordination" and all that.  But don't try telling me that after one week of playing you've gotten these miraculous healing benefits.  I get mental benefits from playing games too...until it gets boring and I drop it and I go right back to where I was before.  As someone who deals with depression myself, I know that, yes, getting out is a good thing, but once this games gets boring, they'll bounce right back to where they were before.  To truly help your depression you need to get to the root of why you're depressed, and work through it, not play a game that makes you forget your depressed for a while.  And just wait till they stop playing the game...unfortunately some will drop deeper then they were before.  It's the same with losing weight.  Unless you keep up with the walking and exercise once you're done with the game, you'll need to keep up with it or you'll just go right back to gaining weight again.

Until something has been proven to last a long time and you've done long term studies on it, don't give me these "health benefits".  If you want to play a game, then man up and say it..."I'm addicted to this ******* thing and I don't care what you think".  Don't walk around saying "Ooooh I play it because of Health benefits" (which was my original argument).  Come on...pull my other leg.

I think being critical is great, and I also don't see a point in people denying the main reason they play, which is because it's fun (I assume). I mean, you're right, if weight loss was their primary goal then this is a pretty poor way of going about it. At the same time, any expert will tell you that walking is better than not walking regardless of how much, how long, and at what pace. I'm just saying it does have benefits and I don't see why people would be negative about it.

As for the mental health piece, in no way am I going to speak to your experience, because I definitely think you know yourself best and I applaud whatever you do on your path to better mental health. I will say that for some people insight is healing and for some behavioural approaches are, and most people will be most helped by a combination of the two. While playing this game isn't guaranteed to improve everyone's mood or experience of anxiety, it certainly can, and there's solid research to back that up. But again, I fully support people doing what they know to be best for themselves, I just don't see why other people (and maybe I'm misunderstanding you and you are not one  of these people) have to be so negative about it.

[Playing With Pokemans]

1 hour ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

theres a difference between hate and sheer annoyance of it all. from the zombies glued to their phone causing issues by paying more attention to their phone then their surroundings, to people constantly talking about it anywhere and everywhere you go (especially annoying when you dont play) and its practically destroyed my fb with stupid posts over and over again.   

 

you like pokemon? great have fun,  but seriously dont infect my world with your childish game, which seems to be unavoidable

To each his own, I suppose. I don't play, have never played any Pokemon games, and never intend to. Still, I see people walking around and talking about it, having fun, and enjoy it. It's certainly better for my health to have that approach.

[Playing With Pokemans]

And I've had people ask me if I play to start conversation when they don't have their phone out and I've seen kids out in our street walking innocently with their phones who I've never seen out before. I've also talked to parents who rarely go out with their kids go out and hunt Pokemon together. Oh yeah, I've also read lots of articles and blogs about and by people who are socializing like they've never before, losing weight, and improving their mental health. With anything this popular you're going to have the idiots, but I've read, seen, and experienced far more good than bad.

The inexplicable hate boggles my mind too...

[Does a blow out at home Thursday get MOS fired?]

11 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I guess you've been wrong for 10 years then. 

Moving on from a bad coach, and that's what O'Shea is, can make a big difference. It can make players worry about their jobs that gets them out of their comfort zone and maybe makes them play better. Players may have 'tuned out' the old coach and may not be able to 'tune out' the new one. The new coach may pull the QB when he's not being effective. He may call the game more aggressively. He may demand changes from the coordinators to match his philosophy. He may sit players who aren't pulling their weight. He may change the way practices are run. He may want to bring in his kind of players from the NFL cuts. He may take the gags off of the players when they talk with the media. 

Keeping a losing coach just because you made the wrong decision to keep him at the end of last year doesn't do anyone any good and you only lose 2 seasons if you gift the new HC the next season AND he doesn't do any better than the fired one.

Agreed. Increasingly keeping O'Shea is looking like throwing good money after bad and if things continue as they are I don't think he should last the season.

[GDT: Edmonton @ Winnipeg]

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Yeah but we did the same thing to Buck Pierce too. Should we throw another qb to the wolves and let them get mentally destroyed before we fix the real problems with this team? 

The mentally destroyed QB is one of the problems, so we should get rid of him and address the other issues. I would actually argue that while other areas of the team have improved (still work to be done, of course), Willy has regressed.