comedygeek

This speculation about Marve and the NFL is crazy. In that Weicek article, much of the extreme terms were not quotes from Marve, but allusions from Weicek. Essentially, he says he wants to play, and if he's still #3 after this year, he may have to look elsewhere to do so. He would love to stay in Winnipeg, but doesn't want to hold the clipboard behind 2 guys for a 3rd straight year. Understandable for anyone who believes they've got the goods. In the recent quote, he flat-out denies the NFL rumours and says he loves Winnipeg. He basically says the same thing as before -- that he'd love to find a way for him to stay here for a long time. Of course, that "way" would be him as a 2nd string or starter. Do we honestly want to laud players who are happy being down on the depth chart and don't want to get better and contribute to the team in a meaningful way? Are people suggesting he be cut *this* year because he doesn't want to spend *next* year staying in the #3 QB position? Continual, late night head shakings going on here. My God!

Fixed it for ya!

Not my call. Haven't been to camp to see them. Don't have access to the meetings, film, etc. Coaches make those decisions. Coaches make the decisions and you criticize those decisions even though you don't have access to practices, meetings, film, etc. The old 'the coaches know more than anyone else' argument. Bomber coaches have crafted 1 winning season since 2008, or 1 in the last 7 seasons, so I don't feel bad about not blindly accepting their decisions. If they can eek out some better records, then I'd put more trust in their decisions. So what do you go by, then? You don't trust the coaches and argue they're bringing the wrong type of players to the exhibition game, but you say that the decision on who to bring is up to the coaches and you have no input on who that should be. If you think they're the wrong players, that's a totally fair opinion to have, but then suggest who those right players are -- otherwise, it's an opinion based on nothing but spite for the coaches we've had in town the last 7 years. Which isn't a great way to analyze a roster.

Hmmm..... I don't drink, or care that much about the Stanley Cup Finals, and I might have plans with the girlfriend. But I do like the idea of putting faces to names! Keep us posted. Heh.

Thursday night games haven't been as consistent in previous years as Friday/Saturday games, but they've still been fairly regular. Committing to one Thursday game per week is likely an extra shot to Rogers, who has the NFL Thursday Night Football rights and (for a few months) will be a direct competition. I have no problem with active competition, as it usually results in a better product, so if the production around TSN Thursday Night games improves, all the better. You're likely to still see mostly Friday and Saturday (and the odd Sunday) games, as those are still big nights for sports and TSN would be silly to give those up to air events that are much less popular. Plus, with the Argos moving out of Rogers Centre, you'll see far less (none?) of those stupid Tuesday or Wednesday night games in future seasons. That's all my guess, of course. I can't know for sure.

Part of it is a lack of radio competition. Country fans will pretty much listen to QX, where as "classic" rock fans might listen to CITI or one of the 3-4 "all eras" stations like BIG 97, BOB, or FAB. None of my favourite music is on the radio, outside of a 3-hour block on CBC Radio 2, so for me it's usually college radio or the music on my phone. I'm also impressed with 1290's ratings, especially remembering how the former sports talk radio version of 1290 did back a decade ago. TSN's brand, along with the obvious Jets rights, definitely help things. But considering they repeat and syndicate a lot of their content, it's still surprising to see it that high.

Tolerance as long as we all agree and don't debate right?It is not the debate that is the issue, it is the vitriol and sanctimoniousness that too often creeps into the debate. Once people start speaking for God, we're into the cesspool. Thanks for proving my point. some people still think homosexuality is wrong, based on their religious beliefs. Welcome to planet earth. You can't kill debate just because you don't agree with someone's opinion. the great thing about our society is debate is still allowed......sort of. Lol. Some people still think black people are lesser humans than white people. Some people think women are second-class compared to men. Just because a certain part of the public holds an opinion, doesn't mean "tolerance" is required -- especially if that opinion specifically includes hate and intolerance. Yes, all those people absolutely have the right to think and believe what they do, but that doesn't mean debate is the best choice in all cases. As for Michael Sam, I assume the Als have done their homework and worked him out, especially if they're offering him $125k per year right off the hop. If that's not the case, then they're setting a terrible precedent. Best of luck to him and them, though! If anyone holds a diff belief then you ..... tolerance is required at all times. Tolerance to someone can not ever be debated because its their right and freedom to do so. You may choose to disagree but you can never say they are wrong. you can never say you are right. The day you choose to say your right and everyone that dont agree is wrong is the day you become no better then ISIS. Whoa... So you're tolerant of pedophiles? Of the KKK? I think we should be tolerant of anything that doesn't hurt another person, but that's where the line is drawn. But it's kind of like freedom -- we can say "complete freedom!" all we want, but if something you're doing in the name of freedom is impacting another person's rights and freedoms, that's not right. Also, even freedom of speech doesn't mean also freedom of rebuke. If people say things horribly racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., they have the right to do so (as long as they're not inciting hatred, which as Atomic pointed out can be criminal), but I'll damn well speak up and speak out against it.

Tolerance as long as we all agree and don't debate right?It is not the debate that is the issue, it is the vitriol and sanctimoniousness that too often creeps into the debate. Once people start speaking for God, we're into the cesspool. Thanks for proving my point. some people still think homosexuality is wrong, based on their religious beliefs. Welcome to planet earth. You can't kill debate just because you don't agree with someone's opinion. the great thing about our society is debate is still allowed......sort of. Lol. Some people still think black people are lesser humans than white people. Some people think women are second-class compared to men. Just because a certain part of the public holds an opinion, doesn't mean "tolerance" is required -- especially if that opinion specifically includes hate and intolerance. Yes, all those people absolutely have the right to think and believe what they do, but that doesn't mean debate is the best choice in all cases. As for Michael Sam, I assume the Als have done their homework and worked him out, especially if they're offering him $125k per year right off the hop. If that's not the case, then they're setting a terrible precedent. Best of luck to him and them, though!

As someone who works in social media, and watches closely what other organizations do, it's entirely likely that the person in charge of the Twitter account just screwed up. The idea that "only a few people" have access is a little misguided, as often social media duties are pawned off to interns and low-level employees. I know several people who, as interns, have had control over the Winnipeg Jets Twitter account. While it would be bad for them to screw up like this, it's absolutely the most likely scenario -- either they heard something unofficial and tweeted it as official, or just made an assumption that was incorrect -- especially with the quickness the tweet was deleted.

Well, the Bombers make revenue from events at IGF (as de facto owners of the venue), and these are big events at IGF, so I'm going to assume that yes, they'll be making money from these games. They also will be showcasing IGF on national and international television, especially with 4 former World Cup champs playing games here (including the U.S.). It's a win-win-win for the city, IGF, and the Bombers.

The Argos have to be out of the dome after 2017. Thanks for the correction! So there's still a bit of time, but not an indefinite amount.

The Argos play in Toronto, not the Bombers. It's Rogers, not Rodgers. The Argos have I believe one season to get out of the Rogers Centre. Rogers are kicking them out, while at the same time preventing them from moving into a perfectly logical new home. It's absolutely disgusting how little Rogers thinks of the CFL.

You know who's a real hero? Hiro from "Heroes." That's a hero. Also Bono. That show is over. so that's all hirote. It's actually coming back as a (so far) limited series with a mostly new cast, but Masa Oki will be reprising his "Hiro" role. So, you know, real hero. Also, me. Avatars don't lie. (Also also, nice pun.)

Farhan Lalji ‏@FarhanLaljiTSN 3h3 hours ago @Yantz16 @Wpg_BlueBombers Awesome fit. You're good enough to play in #CFL

So far there is only some evidence that willy is better then any QB we've had here since 2008. We haven't won more then 7 games since 2008(I think). Soooo. I dunno. Over paying for an average Qb so that we don't possibly lose him but might have to cut if his salary is too high if he is only and average qb ( which is still better then we've had). Give him boost in base pay and then back fill with incentives. If meeting completion %, TDs,int, yard,wins, goals he gets a bonus and maxes out at 400-500k great. Little risk and great rewards. Less reward for willy, but if he believes he is an elite qb and will have a great couple of years then it's a win for him. You don't pay 120k for a crown Victoria hoping or believing it's going to transform into a jaguar becuase u upgrade the rims, tires and intake (ol, receivers, coaching) 2011 - 10 wins and a Grey Cup appearance.

It's interesting that if he was a lower-paid player who needed to work in the off-season (but stayed in Canada during that time), there'd likely be no question about his full-time employment during that time. But because he makes as much as he does as a starting QB, he doesn't technically work from December to May and is thus considered a part-time worker. It's ridiculous, really. Hope it gets sorted out quickly. (As much as I don't like Hank as a player, I think he's shown he deserves to be a citizen of this country if he wants to be!)

These are some of the dumbest rule suggestions I've ever seen. Are we heading towards touch football rules or something? Seriously, this is ridiculous. I hope most of these don't pass.

The one thing going for Jordan Reaves is that his dad is a legendary Bomber. So hopefully at least the fundamentals are down pat. If he can use his athleticism and work on the specifics, he's worth the very very limited risk.

He stands 6'5" and weighs 215 lbs. Could be a FB for the Bombers. He worked out as a receiver and will do the same for the esks He has the athletic pedigree, and if he makes it in the CFL, maybe with the Bombers, it would be the second CFL/NHL brother combo. For a guy who didn't play any college football I find it hard to believe he is a CFL contender... if he was that good why didn't Dobie recruit him (or maybe he did and decided to play bball instead?)... this could just be a case of the name getting a try-out... My guess is that he just felt he was better at basketball and so chose that for college. Who knows? Nothing wrong with taking a look, either way.

Now...... back to this football stadium...... I think it was rushed (obviously) and not designed with every precaution (which any project of this magnitude always should be). It screams of both poor design and poor construction. Aesthetically, the design is great, and I'm sure in most cases the construction team were hard workers and skilled at their crafts -- but corners were cut in both cases, and now the Bombers (or technically BBB) are paying for it. Those losses should absolutely be recouped if possible via a lawsuit, and I hope they are.

I'm a leftie and I can't stand Selinger. I wasn't a huge Doer fan at the time, but in hindsight wow, do I miss him as premiere. I don't think taxes are a bad thing, and spending within reason can help create a great society to live and work in -- but the NDP under Selinger just don't know what they're doing. Plus, he just reeks of insincerity. Of course, I also think Pallister is a religious windbag who would happily take Manitoba back to the 1990s -- and not in any good ways. Manitoba thrived under Doer, and we need a no-nonsense, populous leader who can get things done but also balance budgets. Unfortunately, I don't see one in sight. Western Canada has some pretty decent mayors overall right now, but some pretty piss-poor premieres.

What are some examples? I'm looking to be entertained. Everywhere around the world that I've travelled, I've seen obnoxious bright green jerseys and hoodies and shirts. Checking into a hotel in Vegas, at the old Roman forums in Italy, and has been mentioned multiple times, at every unrelated sporting event known to mankind. I get it if you have a favourite ballcap and it's your hometown/province team. That's what you're going to wear. But it's the whole "look at me I'm a fan of the best team in the world! (that has won very minimally in its history)" mentality that irks me. My uncle wore a full-bright-green Riders hoodie to Thanksgiving dinner one year. (And don't get me started on that family reunion dinner that also coincided with a Banjo Bowl shellacking, where every single person besides me, my mom, and my grandma were all decked out in head-to-toe green. Yes, they're all originally from Saskatchewan, though that's no excuse as my mom is a die-hard Bombers fan now despite being born there.)

The Bombers had the "W" logo before the University of Washington. Interesting, I didn't know that. But, my point is that there is nothing about the plain W on a hat or t-shirt that makes me identify with the Bombers. I love the W on our helmet, but outside of that context, it doesn't make me think of Winnipeg, the Bombers, or football. I get that the point of the W is to connect it with wins. But the logo is three steps back from our 80's logo of the W emerging from behind the football, with the words Blue Bombers. There is no way anybody can misinterpret that logo and what it represented. Not to mention that logo had our team colours nice and bright. To each their own, but I won't be spending any money on merch with the new logo or the navy colours. They do use the classic 80s logo with the football and text as a secondary logo. They actually did a smart thing in combining the font/style of the Blue Bomber text they used in their previous incarnation with the 80s logo to create the current alt logo. As for the jersey colour change, what Kim points out is actually true. You change the jerseys, you're changing the team's primary colours. You change the team's primary colours, that means you're making new equipment orders across the board (all gloves/shoes/socks/towels/etc.), you're repainting significant parts of the stadium and concourse, you're redoing the field, you're re-doing all print materials (tickets/schedules/etc.), and more. It's a significant investment 2-3 years after you've already made a significant investment on the last re-brand. Did they screw up with the last re-brand? Yes. But because of how recent that was, we're likely going to have to wait a few more years to get what we want. Then it will be a triumphant return, with the new everything -- jerseys, equipment, stadium, ads, etc. We'll all scream "FINALLY!" and they'll sell a whole bunch of crap. (In the meantime, you can all still buy your royal blue jerseys, and some of the merch is royal blue, and they do wear them twice a year. )

That kind of stuff is annoying. I don't blame Sears for balking after hearing he could get more money on the open market. Not sure he's worth more than $135,000, but he's a hell of an impact player when he's in the line-up.

My comment is on Reebok's disregard of Royal Blue Well, Reebok did make Royal Blues. We wear them. They know how to do it. The question is just whether it's Reebok's, the CFL's, or the Blue Bombers' decision *not* to use them as our primaries. They exist already. This shouldn't be that hard. Just wear them 8 or 9 times instead of 2. Keep the gold aways if it makes it easier -- I'm sure fans would accept that at this point (even though I think the old whites with royal blue are also great, and I'd happily wear one of those).