Jump to content

Doublezero

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,116

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Doublezero

  1. East Semi Final Game Thread

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    5 hours ago, Noeller said:

    Again, of you read JBRs info (which is 100% based in fact) Steinauer is out, for family reasons. Has wanted out for a couple years but stayed for Caretaker Bob. Now he can go home and Milanovich can take over. 

    OK I did not see that. Milanovich the QB whisperer. Walters takes Dru with him to Ham. Hmmm. So will Walters be dealing with himself when taking offers on Brown's neg rights prior to free agency period? That would be a conflict of interest, right? Everyone seems to think there will be a Dru Brown lottery so Bombers should be able to demand plenty for first right to talk/tamper with him/his agent ... 

  2. West Semi Final GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    There's a reason Jake Maier has the worst QB rating of all the starters (and many of the backups) in the CFL. Just 19 TDs vs 15 picks. As well as a noodle arm, he has no peripheral vision.

    I could see Dickenson, who has been complaining about the offence all season, unloading him next season.

  4. East Semi Final Game Thread

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

    WTF was Steinhauer thinking today??? Just brutal. There has to be fallout from his personnel decisions. He can't just shrug his shoulders & say "next year". Ti Cat fans will not accept it. 

    Look, it was Steinhauer who recruited an injury-plagued and ageing BLM and signed him to a 3-year $1.62 million deal. Young Taylor Powell is prob the best QB on that team right now. So ya, Hamilton braintrust lacking. 

  6. Winnipeg Versus the Ponies Aka Battle of the Reserves GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    Six out of 9 CFL teams (except Toronto, Hamilton & BC) will be after Dru Brown in Free Agency. Argos have Kelly and BC paid a steep price for VAJ last off season as replacement for Rourke. BC might kick some tires on Brown but I doubt they'll be serious contenders for his services. If Milanovich or Burris (or Buck Pierce) are HC In Sask, then as much as I would hate it, I could see Brown going there. In Alberta Dickenson knows Maier is hot garbage and Calgary will for sure make a play for Brown too. Yes, Edmonton has Tre Ford but Jones kept him on the bench forever and obviously prefers an American QB if possible. Dumb, but probable. Crum? Fajardo? Masoli? Brown potentially looks very appealing as a replacement for any of them so all 3 of those clubs will join in the Brown sweepstakes. That leaves Hamilton who might kick some tires on Brown but I think Taylor Powell will be their guy next season as he has actually been pretty good over there. All of this puts Bombers in a nice position when it comes to ceding neg rights for Brown. Makes we wonder why we don't make a real effort to keep Brown here, although, sadly, I don't expect it.

  8. FNF Stamps at Lions GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    3 hours ago, Booch said:

    Yup...glad we don't have assbags like that...speaking of assbags that 47...wtf was that...head butt...then goes down to fake a punch to the gut/nutsack only to fake dude out and try to catch an undercut tomthw chin?? Man the CFL should have a pair of onions and suspend him for next game...that's even beyond Spitty McEyegouge stupidity...BC is just trash thru and thru... especially when not going well for them...overated squad all yr long

    When a team like BC takes that many discipline penalties, it's on the coaching staff. Their D definitely were exposed as vulnerable to the run. A loss like that is not the way you want to go into the playoffs. I expect it'll be Calgary showing up at IG Field for the West final. 

  9. Friday Night Football - Bombers at Leos: GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    Here’s a hypothetical that has to do with sidelines and out of bounds placement/decisions: Let’s say in the future it’s Bombers vs Argos. Sergio Castillo attempts a 55 yard FG that unfortunately goes wide and lands 10 yards deep into the end zone but near the sideline. It’s fielded there by Argos returner Javon Leake. He spots a seam along the sideline and because our kick coverage hasn’t been great this season he darts 120 yards up the sideline and is untouched all the way into the Bombers end zone. He does not step out of bounds as he gallops all that distance. But the guy is such a hotdog that as he runs up the sideline he taunts the Bombers by holding the ball over the sideline marker - well over the plane of the sideline and out of bounds as he is running. He does this for the entire length of the amazing return. What is the result? Is it Touchdown for the Argos because he didn't step OOB, or Single for the Bombers because the ball was over the plane of the sideline and considered OOB from the moment the hotdog stuck the ball out there? (Bombers win this game BTW) :) 

  10. Friday Night Football - Bombers at Leos: GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    34 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

    He is right though. 
     

    The ball is marked where it was when the player stepped out of bounds, not where the foot is.  It is why players extend for the pylon before going out of bounds/down. If it was where your foot was - why would you bother?  
     

    Regardless - Adams was clearly OOB before he extended for extra yards. 

    But if your foot is out of bounds, as you say, the play is dead, regardless of where the ball is. And as you say Adams was OOB before the stretch, hence placement at the point where he stepped out and ended the play. You could have 10 foot long arms and extend all you like but the ball would not be placed 10 feet ahead of where you stepped out. And of course the endzone pylon is different than the sideline. The pylon is considered to be in bounds, since the goal line stretches to infinity. As long as the player remains in bounds he can stretch for the goal line pylon and if the ball touches the pylon it's a TD! The amazing thing about Rasheed Bailey's pylon-diving TD last year was that he floated through the air for the final 5 yards before the ball reached the pylon And because he did not touch the ground with any part of his body, despite being over the plane of the sideline, it was a TD! Tom Higgins explains the rule https://www.cfl.ca/2009/08/19/td-attempts-is-the-pylon-in-play/

  11. Friday Night Football - Bombers at Leos: GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

    When the foot goes out, the play is dead, but it's not marked where the foot went out. It's marked where the ball is when the foot goes out. 

    Extend the ball before the foot goes out, it's where the extension of the ball is. Extend the ball after the foot goes out, you don't get the extension, it's still where the ball was when the foot touches the out of bounds. 

    I took a quick look at the rule book and I didn't find anything definitive regarding marking the ball at the foot when going out of bounds or where the ball is when the foot goes out of bounds.  

    Think of TD's on the sidelines. Player dives while his foot is in the field of play. Ball goes over the line = TD. Player dives, when his foot has touched the sideline = no TD. Neither case needs the players foot to go over the goal line. In both cases, the ball is marked where the ball is when the player touches the sidelines, not where the foot touches. 

    Lets say the VAJ dove instead of pushed the ball forward. If he stepped on the out of bounds line before he dove, he wouldn't get the field advantage of the dive. If he started the dive before he touched the boundary, then he gets where he lands, assuming a head first dive. 

    Let's keep it simple. The play is over when either 1) the player, or 2) the ball, goes out of bounds. So in this case, placement depends whether 1) the foot, or 2) the ball goes out of bounds first. If a player steps out of bounds first the spot is where he stepped out. If the ball goes out of bounds first (while the player remains in-bounds) then the spot is where the ball went out of bounds. In this case VA stepped out of bounds before the ball went out of bounds. Therefore the spot is where his foot was, since the play is dead at that point. There can never be a case where the placement of the spot is where the ball went out if the player previously stepped out.

  12. Friday Night Football - Bombers at Leos: GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted

    1 minute ago, TBURGESS said:

    The ball placement is where the ball is when the foot goes out, not where the foot is when the foot goes out. Example: TD's. Lots of time the knee is down in the field of play, while the ball is over the goal line. That's a TD every time. 

    You can't see the right foot on the TV feed. Does the all 24 have an angle that shows both the foot and ball? 

    When the foot goes out the play is dead. Doesn't matter where the ball is at that point. Can you show me where it says in the CFL rule book that placement is based on where the ball goes out and not the foot? I understand that this would apply to a goal-line play. In that instance it is only when the ball that crosses the plane of the goal that a score is recorded - that's whey you get players diving and extending the ball for the corner marker - like Sheed did so amazingly last year. But I'm not sure that applies anywhere else on the field. As I said, on the sideline for example, at the instant a player steps out of bounds the play is dead. Doesn't matter where the ball is because the play is dead. In this case, VA had already stepped out of bounds. The ball was still moving in the air during his stretch but that's irrelevant.

  13. Friday Night Football - Bombers at Leos: GDT

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    1 hour ago, Booch said:

    cause I watched all 24, not tv feed....and its right foot....outside the head of Biggie...Prob can see it on a TV feed as well

    Agreed. it looks on the CFL.ca highlights as if VA's foot touched the sideline just shy of the 52. And they needed to get to the 53 for the 1st down so he was a full yard short. VA said he thought he stretched and got it - but I believe the rule for ball placement is at the spot where the player steps out of bounds - not where the the ball is when the player goes out of bounds. After all, he stepped out of bounds while the ball was in his hand and still in the air. And the play is dead at the instant the players foot touches the out of bounds mark. You can stretch all the way to Saskatoon, but the ball is no longer live or in play. Someone on the other forum was saying it should be marked where the ball goes out of bounds not where the foot goes out, but I think that would be incorrect (unless we are talking about the goal line). Sometimes, if there is some doubt, the officials will give the ball carrier some benefit and mark it half way between where a knee or foot goes down and the forward point of a stretch. But in this case the sideline official was right there to see exactly where VA's foot stepped on the sideline marker. And he correctly marked it there. Great tackle by Bighill, BTW.

  14. GDT Game 1 @Calgary

    in Winnipeg Jets Discussion

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Noeller said:

    no question Schmidt ****** 'em at the end, but it should never come down to one play. There were plenty... bad goals given up, nets missed offensively..... Jets had their chances. Shouldn't have been close. 

    It was rumoured they tried to move Schmidt over the summer and there were no takers due to his fat contract. Agreed Jets outplayed the Flames last night but as far as Schmidt is concerned it wasn't just that one icing play, he consistently coughs up the puck - 3 or 4 times last night alone. He's a major liability since he almost always struggles during the puck battle or shovels a soft pass that's easily picked. The weakest link. No doubt Heinola would have replaced him had the kid not been injured.

  16. Blue Bombers - 2023 Regular Season - Discussion Thread

    in Blue Bomber Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Doublezero

    1 hour ago, rebusrankin said:

    Schoen was on the sidelines after he went out and seemed ok for what its worth. May have been a precaution.

    I was at the game, in the stands behind the bench 10 rows up. I watched him closely. Schoen was definitely nursing a "lower body" ouch when he came out of the game. He was mobile and walking on the sidelines, trying to keep the weight off and testing things - walking & trotting a little. I won't say any more than that, other than to venture that he would not have been effective had he gone back onto the field of play. Hopefully everyone is all healed up after the bye-week. 

    The atmosphere during the game was amazing, by the way.  Boisterous supportive crowd of Big Blue fans behind the Bombers bench. All the Bomber players noticed and definitely appreciated that support from the fans. Post-game victory chants echoed through BC Place for a long time as Bomber fans (lots of them) celebrated that exciting and important win!

×
×
  • Create New...