Bigblue204

I could have sworn Begelton was CDN...Wasn't there a big REC in calgary that was? edit: Brescacin is who I was thinking of. Anyway, that's what I mean. To increase the talent pool in the CFL better Canadian supports are needed. It's an interesting thing to think about (getting rid of the ratio) and I obviously lean towards keeping it. But I don't think there would be a significant jump in entertainment if it were gone. I honestly don't care if they are big names or not. I don't question their passion for making it in the NFL. But if they don't even want to come and TRY the CFL...obviously their passion for being a professional football player isn't that great. Or they would do it. Yes they would be risking all of the things you mentioned...but that's what it takes to play in the CFL. If they REALLY wanted to play, they would. Like all the Americans currently sitting on the PR.

The GOAT!

I see your point. But honestly I think this is becoming an outdated point of view. The talent of Canadians in the game now is the best it's ever been. Yes there are a few guys playing who would lose out on a spot without the ratio, but that is decreasing every year. More and more Canadians are getting signed to the NFL before the CFL and more and more CFLers are signing down south too. If anything the ratio is giving guys an opportunity who likely wouldn't have been given a shot. You can't ignore the perception American coaches have of Canadian players (though that seems to be changing too). Would Andrew Harris ever have been given a shot to play if he wasn't Canadian? Demski? Boateng? Begelton? These guys aren't exciting to watch play? If we didn't have the ratio, we also don't have home town hero's making legacies for themselves or the story lines that brings. Getting rid of the ratio isn't the answer, developing better Canadians is. And that appears to be happening. Honestly, I don't care if some wannabe doesn't want to come up here to play. To me, that means they don't have the passion that's needed to make it in the first place, and that's ok too...not everyone can be a CFLer.

Ok so your argument originally was that our Oline sucked because the team tried drafting Olineman and weren't successful. I'm saying that is not what happened. Before Walters, our drafting of Olineman was basically nil. That WAS the problem...former management did not prioritize drafting linemen. And the team spent years playing americans and trading/signing other teams cast offs. It wasn't until Walters came in and made olineman a priority in the Draft that the oline got significantly better. Chungh started as a rookie and Goosen was a 2nd year starter. The other 3 positions were given to the best players who happened to be american (1 being an all time great).

Um....you have it backwards...when Walters became GM he made a point of addressing the line via the Draft. Then it got significantly better. Bryant has been here for a while, he has played on some bad Bomber olines. It got better because our GM/Scouts were able to recognize Canadian talent, AND we had one of the GOATS as a LT. I'm not sure why you chose the Oline to show how bad CND talent can be...I'd say there are far more Cnd linemen in the NFL then any other position.

Calgary, hamilton, ottawa and edmonton have all been quite too. I'm not gonna give 3rdown a click just to read a bunch of speculation and BS.

Merry Christmas everyone! Drink something tasty smoke something funny and eat more then you should!!

Jesus christ, are we really getting to the off-season time of "why isn't Walter's doing anything?" We all know teams have till Feb 2021 right?

Anyone paying attention to the 3rdown 100 top CFL players list? Wtf were they smoking?? They put Gainey, Unamba and Medlock ahead of Bighill....BIGHILL, yes the guy one year removed from DPOY....Medlock is great, but he is NOT a better football player then Bighill. And thise other two aren't even great. Unamba is solid and Gainey is a ******* fraud.

Many are appointment based if I'm not mistaken. Line ups aren't what they used to be due to that.

Viking fans are like Leaf fans...Next year is always their year! lol.

Does Biden even know what year it is?

Exactly what I was thinking. Good start...but let's get some more on there!!!

I understand that. Your speaking to the converted here. But lets not pretend medical issues have not been used to harm individuals or populations. Even THIS year there have been down right awful circumstances. I will NEVER attack/belittle anyone asking questions about a drug and it's potential side effects. That's a slippery slope when we allow that to happen. And if you have the experience you know very well there are no substitutes for long term data. This type of behavior from the media/government etc isn't just dangerous now...it's dangerous for the years a head.

I mean if Dallas' Defence wasn't doing their job, why should the refs?

Right I agree with that. What I'm saying is I'm seeing articles like the one from the Times, as well as other chatter online about people who have legitimate questions about the long term consequences of this vaccine being called out as anti-vaxxers. When we should be asking these questions.

Lol the article doesn't have her saying she against vaccines. Have you read it? I'm also against government mandates. Especially when it comes to my body. I understand why they're needed...we got a bunch of idiots running around...but we as a society need to be very cautious and assertive when it comes those types of laws. We should be volunteering to take the vaccine because it's based on solid evidence and good science. Not because the government says so.

I actually went and researched her a bit more and came to that same conclusion. My main point is, the article in the Times does a HORRIBLE job of showing that she's anti-vaxxer (though I still don't think she is anti-vaccine just overall crazy) it does make it seem like if you have questions about the safety of THIS vaccine, you should be shunned and turned into an anti-vaxxer. And that's bullshit. And more and more media outlets are doing this type of bullshit reporting. It happens from the right via Antifa and it's happening on the Left with those who have real questions about the vaccine or defunding the police. This vaccine is brand new. AND based on a brand new technology. And we have 0 long term data, not even 12 months worth. That's 100% outside of the norms for any vaccine ever developed. It's not a bad thing to question this is really all I'm saying.

Show me were she states that though. That's what I'm saying.

Yeah that was the original article that I commented on. Again, having questions about vaccines...which is all I've seen from her does not equal anti vaxxer. Having questions about this vaccine is important and should not be seen as anti science. Anyone who is peddling that either doesn't understand how science works or is pushing an agenda. Either way that's not good. The Times has really started to fall off when it comes to good journalism.

Reported by who? Anti-vaxer has taken on many different things, including asking questions about vaccines.

Fair enough...though again...we need to be careful, the Left demonizes people just as easily as the Right does.

Hydroxychloroquine has been used to help fight Covid though...it's not a cure by any means, but Doctors have used it to help treat patients. And yes. We do need to question things. What are the long term side effects? Is that not a fair question to ask? I haven't been able to confirm (so take this with a grain of salt) but I have heard they didn't test recipients of the vaccine who didn't have symptoms after getting it...not a big deal right...but are any of them asymptomatic...if so, can they still spread it? Why weren't they tested? These are fair questions as far as I'm concerned. I also consider it bad science to ignore these issues. Also I don't think she's a quack. That was kinda my point. She just has fair questions that deserve answers. We read headlines, and quick quotes and think that's the story. But reading the actual article, nothing she said or even anything the aurthor of the article said made her out to be some Right wing anti vaxxer. The article headline did though.

I don't know...did you read the article? Someone having questions about the side effects of a new drug are labelled conspiracy theorists and anti vaxers...? That's bullshit. Having concerns is 100% needed and necessary. We need people who question things. That's good science. I'm also 100% against government making this mandatory. I'm sure if I stopped there, loads of people would be willing to right me off as anti vaxer. But I'll be getting the vaccine when it's available. Because I trust science. Not because the government told me to. Doing anything that way is dangerous and not acceptable in a free society.

The debate about his feelings started with me saying, Kingsbury saying nice things about Streveler isn't proof that Streveler is some amazing talent. It was just a coach being a coach. Obviously he thinks he's good, he's his #2. But also....of course he is gonna say good things about him to the media, he's a head coach.