comedygeek

Or Anthony Calvillo. Heh.

I think the Als jerseys are slick and creative, and the Ticats are simple but effective. The black numbers on black jersey ruin BC's for me, but it's still better than the Argos' or Bombers'. I don't hate Saskatchewan's as much as others do (still way better than their all-white unis) and besides the logo on the front, the RedBlacks' are decent. I find ours worse than the dreaded mid-90s jerseys right after we switched to navy and were lacking a lot of gold -- and I hated those things with a passion. Thank God we only have to see them one more time next season.

Disagree.... If you listen to some of the denizens, on RF.....their current winning streak (including the one against us)....is one for the ages... It's not like the Riders are the defending Grey Cup Champions or anything. With the amount of movement in the CFL each offseason, combined with the expansion draft, being the defending champs doesn't mean an incredible amount. Sure, it gives you a head start (and some instant respect), but that'll only go so far. Then again, despite the West's dominance, every single team has looked beatable this season. Calgary's offense hasn't impressed me at all, including against Ottawa, B.C. and Saskatchewan are very hot and cold, and Edmonton is riding high on its defense for the time being (which could carry them all the way through, but rarely does in this league). The Bombers are still so unknown, even at 6-3 -- they're somewhere between an average team and an elite team, and it'll probably take until close to the end of the regular season to really know what kind of team they'll be (hopefully) heading into the playoffs, regardless of their actual record. The fact that the Bombers, after a few rough offensive outings and with MB as the OC, are still #1 in the league in many offensive categories, definitely says something about the entire state of offenses in the CFL this year. At least 6 teams can lay claim to a solid defense (and Ottawa's is coming together, too), but who would you actually be worried about regularly putting up 400 yards of total offense? The Bombers, Lions, and Argos are really the only ones who have done it even semi-consistently this year.

Except at the time he deferred the salaries he had no idea what this year's cap would be. But everyone was almost certain it was going to be going up this year -- we didn't know how much, but it was a certainty it would be significant. (Still a bad play, I think. But not as bad as in 2008 for us.)

It's funny to hear these jerseys being called hipster. I think of these as the opposite of hipster -- a proper retro jersey would be far more "hipster". Those suits you're describing (and thank God for them -- finally people can wear suits that look good without spending $1000) are a little hipster, but not flashy bright clothing and all that. I would say most of that is pretty bro-y. But what do I know? I bought a grey-pink suit from England and love it. Heh. (Also, all these new jerseys will suck. )

Yeah, besides the Holiday Inn which has been there for ages, the Army Surplus store has been gone for several years -- that spot is now part of the U of W, and also houses a Stella's. (By the way, Bingo_Arms, you should definitely go eat at Stella's. It's across the street from your hotel and super good!)

I do think that Willy will be just as motivated as Ford, but it's not like the Riders cut Willy. He moved on because he wanted to start.False. Taman is on record as saying that they were moving on from Willy because he didn't fit their plans and they like their current back up better. They were going to let him go to FA but we tossed em a token piece for his neg rights. I don't care how Taman wanted to spin it. Willy was leaving to get a shot at starting. "I don't care what people who know the actual facts say, I'm sticking with my idea!!!" You're as obnoxious as ever. You really think that Willy would re-sign with the Riders to sit on the bench for another season when he had a chance to start elsewhere and to make starters money? Hey comedygeek, no complaints about this post being rude? Funny how that works.... I think it was a combination of both.... Willy had a chance to start & the fact that the Riders seemed high on Sunseri for some reason. I know some Rider fans sure were. So, the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. Actually thought he should have been #2 last year. Maybe Duressler47 can explain it for us. All I know is Willy is our guy now... That's all I care about. "Abounds" means it goes well beyond one person. (Some people I don't expect any better from because they're always the same way, I guess. In other cases, I don't understand it and feel like saying something at 4am when I should be sleeping. Heh.)

Rudeness abounds.

He was out of his league in so many ways. But if you step into a job, and on essentially your first day everyone involved on all fronts in a project that long predates you tells you -- with absolute certainty -- that the project is going to be completed on time, only someone who wanted to lose his job before it started would disregard everyone else (including the board above him, contractors, stadium leaders, etc.) and say, "I just don't know what our plan is for next year." Anyone in that scenario, giving the timing, would tell the public exactly what they've been assured. He screwed up a LOT in his time as CEO of the Bombers, but the stadium mess was on the stadium people, including the Buchko Guarantee. He was lied to on Day 1, and he bought it because everyone assured him from the ground up that it was the case, and then he ended up having to be the face of the failure. I can't imagine being in that situation -- taking the public fall for something that had so many pieces screwing up and lying about it (including to you) outside of your control. Defending one thing does not mean defending the body of work. Tim Burke made a couple correct calls in his year and a half as our head coach, but his tenure here is still indefensible. Same thing with Joe Mack -- some good choices in there, but overall body of work was clearly a failure and (save for a few here) can't be defended.

Did you like Caws & Effect? They rehearsed in the space that I run when they got into town, and the piano used in the soundtrack was actually my 4th generation piano (I didn't know this until they told me after the show I saw). Heard Nashville Hurricane was insane, but I missed it myself. I saw a bunch of my friends' shows and a couple out-of-town shows (I think 14 in total?) but missed out on some good ones.

Does a bear Catholic? What??? I thought about this for 10 minutes and I still don't get it. Do you mean "Is the pope Catholic"? It's a funny, purposefully non-sensical combination of "Does a bear **** in the woods?" and "Is the Pope Catholic?" I found this one funnier than the usual combination, which is "Does the Pope **** in the woods?" So kudos, Tracker, for making me laugh on a forum that isn't the one I normally go to for laughs. Also, I can't believe how boring I was there in explaining a joke. There is nothing more unfunny in the world than the explanation of a joke. I wish I could downvote myself or something. Haha.

Does a bear Catholic? What??? I thought about this for 10 minutes and I still don't get it. Do you mean "Is the pope Catholic"? It's a funny, purposefully non-sensical combination of "Does a bear **** in the woods?" and "Is the Pope Catholic?" I found this one funnier than the usual combination, which is "Does the Pope **** in the woods?" So kudos, Tracker, for making me laugh on a forum that isn't the one I normally go to for laughs.

ESPN 3 isn't a "network". It's only online. So no pub or lounge could air it unless they streamed it from their computer onto the screen.

I get the jokes and stuff, but really, we're gonna razz on people for not leaving their towns that are in STATES OF EMERGENCY to go to a football game THEY ALREADY BOUGHT TICKETS FOR? It's not the same thing as having some water in the street and going to the mall, Goalie. Unless of course you had to drive a couple hours through the least safe conditions to get there, you had a good chance your house was going to start flooding while you were gone, the MTS store was outside, and you had to be there for over 3 hours. Honestly, I'm impressed there were 19,000. I would've expected a few hundred given the conditions. That's probably what we would've gotten in Winnipeg. Heh.

Gee, I see it differently: I was impressed by the way Romby Bryant stood up to that schmuck Mike Kelly, gave him the finger, and forced Kelly to trade him away. But by doing that to Kelly, he also did it to all his teammates as well. Kelly was an idiot & control freak. I don't recall all the circumstances that led to Bryant coming to Calgary but Kelly's "My way or the highway wanting to control the message" arrogance led to his ultimate dismissal as head coach. I blame the coach & not the player. His Majesty King Kelly treated just about everyone badly in the Bomber court, fans, media & even Bob Irving. You didn't/don't like Kelly and I'm certainly not going to defend him. But I do remember the circumstances of Bryant's trade. I do remember the absolute lack of effort by Bryant. He didn't like Kelly's offence - fine but that didn't give him the right to quit on the team. I still remember this play in his last game as a Bomber. He made a catch along the sidelines - both hands on the ball - and then the Als' defender reached in with one hand and easily grabbed the ball from him. It's difficult to describe how pathetic the play was - it really does need to be seen - but the one thing it showed clearly was that Bryant didn't care. So, Bryant goes to Calgary & he has back to back to back thousand plus yard seasons. Sure, blame the player not the lunatic coach running the team at the time. Kelly squandered a very good receiver. By criticizing Bryant you're defending Kelly so... But nobody else quit on the team in spectacular fashion like Romby. Derick Armstrong says hello. Touché.

Gee, I see it differently: I was impressed by the way Romby Bryant stood up to that schmuck Mike Kelly, gave him the finger, and forced Kelly to trade him away. But by doing that to Kelly, he also did it to all his teammates as well. Kelly was an idiot & control freak. I don't recall all the circumstances that led to Bryant coming to Calgary but Kelly's "My way or the highway wanting to control the message" arrogance led to his ultimate dismissal as head coach. I blame the coach & not the player. His Majesty King Kelly treated just about everyone badly in the Bomber court, fans, media & even Bob Irving. You didn't/don't like Kelly and I'm certainly not going to defend him. But I do remember the circumstances of Bryant's trade. I do remember the absolute lack of effort by Bryant. He didn't like Kelly's offence - fine but that didn't give him the right to quit on the team. I still remember this play in his last game as a Bomber. He made a catch along the sidelines - both hands on the ball - and then the Als' defender reached in with one hand and easily grabbed the ball from him. It's difficult to describe how pathetic the play was - it really does need to be seen - but the one thing it showed clearly was that Bryant didn't care. So, Bryant goes to Calgary & he has back to back to back thousand plus yard seasons. Sure, blame the player not the lunatic coach running the team at the time. Kelly squandered a very good receiver. By criticizing Bryant you're defending Kelly so... His success in Calgary was further proof of his childishness in Winnipeg. From all accounts, nobody liked Kelly's offense. But nobody else quit on the team in spectacular fashion like Romby. It was terrible, and, even amongst the horror of that season, I was still glad he was gone. Be a pro. Do your job.

That's ridiculous. You sign him because if he turns out to be MUCH better, you obviously keep him. And he could've been. He just wasn't. He was good, but so was Lirim. You never really know how these things shake out until the season gets going, but what if our kicker ends up with a better % or more points than Ottawa's? Every team has made "huge mistakes" year after year, even the best, because it's often close enough in training camp that tough calls have to be made.

Not an update for Android, as far as I recall. I believe it notified me when I tried to load the old one that there was a new one to replace it (along with a link).

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/football/bombers/Former-Bombers-coach-Grant-to-be-honoured-with-statue-at-Investors-Group-Field-262155191.html

I think the last opinion poll I saw had his approval rating hovering around 10% or something. So, well, yeah.

Still not responsive which, in 2014, is frankly just behind the times. Looks good, though.

While I don't agree, I can see the argument behind more generic-sounding (but still culturally-appropriating AT BEST) names like "Braves" and "Blackhawks". But the term "Redskins" is so blatantly racist that it's sad there are so many defenders of the team keeping the name. Why don't we start there and then re-assess. The idea that, "If we change their name, when does it end?" is kind of BS anyway. It's like saying, "If we let black people eat in our restaurant, where does it end?" Like let's not stop doing bad things, because there's a small chance it may over time maybe possibly lead to going too far the other way.

Gotta love the professionalism of an official statement including FOUR exclamation points at the end of a sentence. These players are showing how out of their league (no pun intended) they are in these dealings. They're throwing around "facts" that not only leave out important information, but also still don't completely support their position. Let's hope they smarten up before we lose real games. Higher minimum salary than the league is offering, slightly larger increases overall, and a compromised contract length (5-6 years) should do it!

How do the players deserve much more if the owners aren't making money or barely are? I heard on the radio today Herb Z from Montreal say he heard from sources that in the last 10 years, Braley, Wetenhall, and Young have cumulatively lost about $90-100 million. That's insane. Yes, these guys have money, but in this league that basically means they have the money to lose. The CFL isn't a financial windfall opportunity for any of these owners -- they own the teams because they love the game. Combine that with the 3 community-owned teams, which by design aren't out to screw over the players but basically break even (or have some emergency funds), and I don't know who the players really think they're going up against here. Yes, a reasonable increase is due, and I think somewhere a little higher than what the owners are offering currently is probably where it should end up. But if there are actual games lost over this disaster, it'll be sad and ridiculous. Nobody in the CFL is getting rich off of it, save for a few elite players and a couple top-end executives and coaches. Most players will never get rich, and most owners will lose money owning teams. As a single guy, I'm perfectly happy and comfortable making $30,000/year right now. I lease a nice car, can go on trips, can eat, and besides the car lease am debt-free. Granted, things will need to change should I start a family someday, but chances are most of these league minimum players are not 22-year-olds with big families. $50,000 for 6 months of work is pretty good for a league minimum in a league where the people paying the bills are probably losing money. Let's just get a deal done so we can watch some damn football in a couple weeks.

Dude... she's not claiming she "knows so much" and she's not saying Bauer was definitely hired already (even though we'll never know what "handshake" deals were in place long before any formal announcements). She's using links to actual stories to prove that the Bauer-to-Stamps rumours started BEFORE he left the Bombers (see: Ed Tait article) and then using links to actual stories to prove that there was at least some Bauer-to-Stamps talk in the Calgary media shortly after he left the Bombers. Those are both facts. They're not Jacquie making stuff up. They're real newspaper articles written by real newspaper reporters. It's irrelevant who wrote them (and that you don't care about them because of who wrote them). The point is, they were written, so the idea that there was talk wasn't made up, regardless of who was doing the talking. (And frankly, if Ed Tait circa 2009 is hearing rumours in the CFL and printing them, they're almost certainly coming from some place legitimate -- which, surprise surprise, they turned out to be!) Also, why must you make blanket statements like, "You just can't stand it when someone questions you, eh Jacquie?" It's rude and extremely condescending, even more so based on the fact that you weren't actually questioning her, but questioning the validity of the news articles she was presenting. She made up exactly 0% of what you're accusing her of making up.