blueandgoldguy

People falling all over themselves saying how they won't be going because the prices are too high.... ok?  Stay home then?  It's going to sell out easily.

People paying this price are going to be sore when the Packers opt not to dress Aaron Rodgers.

I expected high prices.  I didn't expect prices that high.  

When you have the best kicker/punter in the league
And he is as "quirky" as they come
You don't mess with the tools he needs
To get the job done.
His snapper being priority #1
 
Your comments are like lyrics from a  song.

No that is not intellectual.  That is  aardvarking...at least if you were on the other site.

Valour FC will likely need all those revenues attributed to them to break even and even though they are owned by the Bombers they are their own entity and have to account for their own expenses and revenues.  Perhaps the only additional revenue the Bombers will receive from the Valour will be rental fees for use of the stadium.  This will be fairly minimal given the team will likely average 5,000 per game (hopefully more).  And that would be a little strange considering they are the owners of the team...shifting around money.  

Willard Reaves was a great back. Absolutely dominated his position in the CFL & was feared as he could deliver some punishing hits as a back & was strong enough to run over tacklers. On the next play he could finesse, dangle a tackler & then explode by him. He also had the advantage of a great OL blocking for him. Loved watching guys like Reaves, Miller & others play as they were all deserving of the praise heaped on them.
However, I was fortunate enough to see Dave Raimey play. He played on a very bad football team. He didn't have the luxury of a great OL opening holes for him. Matter of fact, the OL that played in front of him was the worst in the CFL from 1967 thru the 1969 season. There wasn't a great qb calling the plays as Ken Ploen had retired to be replaced by the inept rookie John Schneider. There was no genius coordinator calling the plays just the hapless Joe Zaleski. Raimey had just one teammate who could be a threat as a receiver in flanker Ken Nielsen. That was it for the Bomber offense as far as personnel went. Raimey had to virtually do it all on his own.
The result was he didn't have better stats than a  number of other backs on this list. Yet between 1965 & the first 2 games of the 1969 season he rushed for almost 4,000 yards & was elected into the CFL HOF in 1989. That speaks volumes for a player stuck on not just a bad team at the time but a dreadful team! He was a CFL All Canadian in 1966 as well as a Western Conference All Star in 1965, 1966, 1967 & 1968 for Winnipeg. He was the CFL leading rusher in 1966. He was a dangerous kick returner as well with  3,234 KO yards for the Bombers. I know that this may sound like a cliche but he did put the Bombers on his back multiple times & carried that team as there was literally no one else that could do it. I don't see the nominees listed yet but once they are, he & Lewis will be my 2 choices.
 
And no, Raimey was not an obscure player nor am I trying to impress anyone here with my knowledge. I'm trying to contribute & partake of that knowledge as I saw most of these players play. I known how good some of them were against their contemporaries. I too, am frustrated that a current player in Bryant won as a tackle over some other of the greats but it is what it is, I guess.

Keep the ratio where it is.  It dropped from 10 starters to 7 and then down to 6.  It should NEVER drop any lower unless the league expanded to 12 or more teams.  It is the CANADIAN Football League and it needs to have as many Canadian roster spots as possible. 
Most domestic leagues around the world have rules for the number of starter spots and roster spots for its players.  It help promotes the sport within the country - both from a developmental and commercial perspective.  
It is short-sighted and lazy to lower the ratio and "let the best men play" as it will discourage participation and development of football players at the lower levels.  This will in turn lead to fewer quality players being available to make the jump to the pros...in turn, this leads to demands for a lower ratio and the cycle continues...This  doesn't even factor in reduced interest from the Canadian audience with fewer Canadian players in the league.  Reduced TV and live attendance are likely to follow.
  

Keep the ratio where it is.  It dropped from 10 starters to 7 and then down to 6.  It should NEVER drop any lower unless the league expanded to 12 or more teams.  It is the CANADIAN Football League and it needs to have as many Canadian roster spots as possible. 
Most domestic leagues around the world have rules for the number of starter spots and roster spots for its players.  It help promotes the sport within the country - both from a developmental and commercial perspective.  
It is short-sighted and lazy to lower the ratio and "let the best men play" as it will discourage participation and development of football players at the lower levels.  This will in turn lead to fewer quality players being available to make the jump to the pros...in turn, this leads to demands for a lower ratio and the cycle continues...This  doesn't even factor in reduced interest from the Canadian audience with fewer Canadian players in the league.  Reduced TV and live attendance are likely to follow.
  

Keep the ratio where it is.  It dropped from 10 starters to 7 and then down to 6.  It should NEVER drop any lower unless the league expanded to 12 or more teams.  It is the CANADIAN Football League and it needs to have as many Canadian roster spots as possible. 
Most domestic leagues around the world have rules for the number of starter spots and roster spots for its players.  It help promotes the sport within the country - both from a developmental and commercial perspective.  
It is short-sighted and lazy to lower the ratio and "let the best men play" as it will discourage participation and development of football players at the lower levels.  This will in turn lead to fewer quality players being available to make the jump to the pros...in turn, this leads to demands for a lower ratio and the cycle continues...This  doesn't even factor in reduced interest from the Canadian audience with fewer Canadian players in the league.  Reduced TV and live attendance are likely to follow.
  

Keep the ratio where it is.  It dropped from 10 starters to 7 and then down to 6.  It should NEVER drop any lower unless the league expanded to 12 or more teams.  It is the CANADIAN Football League and it needs to have as many Canadian roster spots as possible. 
Most domestic leagues around the world have rules for the number of starter spots and roster spots for its players.  It help promotes the sport within the country - both from a developmental and commercial perspective.  
It is short-sighted and lazy to lower the ratio and "let the best men play" as it will discourage participation and development of football players at the lower levels.  This will in turn lead to fewer quality players being available to make the jump to the pros...in turn, this leads to demands for a lower ratio and the cycle continues...This  doesn't even factor in reduced interest from the Canadian audience with fewer Canadian players in the league.  Reduced TV and live attendance are likely to follow.
  

Keep the ratio where it is.  It dropped from 10 starters to 7 and then down to 6.  It should NEVER drop any lower unless the league expanded to 12 or more teams.  It is the CANADIAN Football League and it needs to have as many Canadian roster spots as possible. 
Most domestic leagues around the world have rules for the number of starter spots and roster spots for its players.  It help promotes the sport within the country - both from a developmental and commercial perspective.  
It is short-sighted and lazy to lower the ratio and "let the best men play" as it will discourage participation and development of football players at the lower levels.  This will in turn lead to fewer quality players being available to make the jump to the pros...in turn, this leads to demands for a lower ratio and the cycle continues...This  doesn't even factor in reduced interest from the Canadian audience with fewer Canadian players in the league.  Reduced TV and live attendance are likely to follow.
  

Today I have brought shame upon my family. 

okay, rod black

Zylstra, Mitchell or Duke.
Honestly, right now I'm disappointed with the way we tackled free agency. I'm not too bent out of shape about Chungh, since the whole point of developing a strong stable of Canadian OL is to be prepared when departures come up. That's the business. I'm not too disappointed about Loffler, because anyone willing to pay him those dollars is insane. I'm mildly disappointed about JSK, but we kept Bighill and to me that is far more important, so hey, fine. Receiver grosses me out. We needed a WR1 worse than any team in the league and we lost out on all of them.

I've mentioned this to a few friends of mine. But I'm starting to honestly think a lot of the top tier rec in this league may not like the idea of playing in a Nichols lead Offence.

The next half-decent receiver Walters finds will be the first. Since we’re resigned to playing Nichols as long as he’s healthy, I’d rather he had as much support through great receivers as possible. 

After his Swaggerville days and such, I gave this dude a hard time- but in the end... Guy's got class. 
 

In only 3 games with Nichols as his QB back in 2015, Walker tallied 31 receptions for 470 yards and a TD. That works for me.

You want to talk Walters? OK, I'll go there, but that's not where I was going before this post.
Walters MO in the past revolved around working the FA market big time, bringing in experienced guys and hoping that our scouts could fill in the blanks. This year he's gotten rid of a bunch of experienced guys and hasn't done much in the FA market. I hope the scouts can actually fill in the blanks this year.
Walters biggest get this year was Bighill. No problem at all with that. We paid him big. We found him more money outside the SMS. All in all, good work. Goosen is one of our biggest losses, which isn't on Walters. He also extended a couple of good players. So far. So good.
Losing Chungh wouldn't have been as big a deal if we hadn't already lost Goosen, but changing out 2 all star, NI OL at the same time is a big deal. Complaining that Chungh's camp knew that his value went up was sour grapes IMO, but Walters stuck to his 'number' and let Chungh walk. He stuck to his 'number' and let JSK walk. He stuck to his 'number' and let Loffler (A good decision IMO) walk. He also let Randle go, which I personally don't agree with. It remains to be seen if the new cheaper starters promoted from with in work out.
Jefferson's a great DE. Rose can play although 3 teams in 3 years is a bit of a red flag. I'm on the record saying I'd have used the SMS room differently and I stick to my opinion.
Making offers isn't Walters job. Signing players is. Other teams seem to value most of the FA's that we wanted more than we do. Is Walters 'number' the right one to get us the top players? It doesn't look like it is. I don't see us fixing the problems that we knew we had going into FA. I don't see us replacing the guys we lost to FA with FA's.
I'd give Walters a C- so far in this year's FA game. That's hardly hating everything he does.

If that's the case, my Schrute still stands...

Hervey has placed his neck squarely on the chopping block. If the Lions stumble coming out of the gate and continue, he will be given the axe before Labour Day.

I'm telling you, without knowing what the real numbers are and the rest of the SMS for both teams, no one can possibly answer that question with any degree of accuracy.
Lets say twitter is right. BC offered $250K and we offered $200K. I'd have at least matched the Lions number, maybe 5K more. I'd rather have Chungh than Jefferson at $200+K.