TrueBlue4ever

This bio from bluebombers.com and the Hall of Fame section regarding Jeff Nicklin. A true hero whom we can thank for our freedom today. "Nicklin was sent overseas to Europe as part of the Royal Winnipeg Rifles and was then named the Commanding Officer of the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion. He was one of the first Canadians to jump on D-Day in 1944, led his division in the Battle of the Bulge and was among the first to jump into Germany as part of Operation Varsity in March of 1945. Alas, his chute got tangled up in a tree and he was shot and killed as he tried to wrestle free. As a tribute to Nicklin, the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion donated the Jeff Nicklin Memorial Trophy to the Western Interprovincial Football Union in 1946, and it is awarded annually to the top player in the Canadian Football League’s West Division."

Yes, you. I’ll add him in.

I must cop to an error on my part. Rigney did play defensive tackle, but his awards WERE for his work as an o-lineman. I confused his bio with D-I-c-k Huffman, who also played both ways, and in fact HE won an all-star nod as both an offensive and defensive player in the same year. Rigney will be pulled from the defensive tackle list. Thanks for auditting me.

Good call, John Helton could also be in the running for top 2. Even though he did more damage as a Stampeder early in his career, his Bomber legacy is still quite impressive (kind of like Gretzky’s LA Kings legacy - nowhere near his Oiler glory but on its own still remarkable). And I think some experts put Helton above Brown for greatest in CFL history. 9 time CFL all-star, 12 time divisional all-star, 2 time CFL defensive player/lineman of the year.

So here is a preliminary list of defensive tackles to consider. The first 4 are older players who played both ways and could easily fall into the “offensive tackle” position, so if you think they are misplaced here, speak up. D-I-c-k Huffman, Buddy Tinsley (may be more well known as an o-lineman), Steve Patrick, Frank Rigney (definitely an o-lineman but also was an all-star multiple times as a defensive tackle). Also John Helton, Stan Mikawos, Joe Fleming, Doug Brown, Denny Fortney, and Bryant Turner Jr. List compiled based on all-star nominations. Anyone missed, or anyone who shouldn’t be here?

One man's take: Herb Gray, as I said, is a runaway winner here, or certainly should be. I pray he does not suffer from recency bias, because like Rod Hill at cornerback, Greg Battle at middle linebacker and Ty Jones at outside linebacker, he is head and shoulders above the competition. 6 straight all-star nods and 7 overall is unparalleled on this or almost any club at this position. Bomber defensive player of the half century, 'nuff said. And all the team success to boot. One of the greatest players on the greatest Bomber era of all. Vote him in, people. As for #2, there is no clear favourite. I will put them in groups, but not necessarily worst to first. The older guard: Nicklin and Marquandt both played in the 30's and 40's when the role of a defensive lineman was different, and two-way players were the standard. Impossible to compare eras in this way, and the important tackle and sack stats did not exist, so I cannot properly judge. What I can say in Nicklin's case is that he's the only Bomber with a league trophy named after him, and my everlasting respect and gratitude for his military service. God bless. Whisler in the 60's and Heighton in the 70's both had strong achievements in all-star nom and league award areas, and again the lack of tackle or sack stats make it hard to grade them against the others. A lack of team success for most of both of their careers lowers their profile. I would encourage any who saw them play to give them a fair shout out, as I cannot. So I am not dismissing their merits, I simply cannot judge them fairly and don't have a league success or "Legend" context to categorize them in like Herb Gray, so I will not personally consider them as my second choice. Of the remaining 7 players I have seen, here is how I view them: Pete Catan - with Tony Norman on the other side, gave the early '80's Bombers a great outside push on the line (both players had multiple 10+sack seasons playing together). He gets bonus points for being a model rocket enthusiast who attached rockets to his helmet at practice and fired them off into the stands on occasion. But he played for fewer years and had smaller stats that his teammate Tony, so he will not make the top 2. Odell Willis and Jamaal Westerman - both were very impressive in short spurts, and their sack totals look impressive for the limited number of career games they played, but each loses out to me because they just weren't here long enough and 40-some games is not the stuff of an all-timer for me. Willis may gain or lose points depending on your perspective of the whole "Mayor of Swaggerville" phenomenon (if you like or dislike trash talk and boasting with your play). Tom Canada - People loved his motor, but I wonder if he would be a fan favourite if his name was "Tom Germany" or some other country's moniker? Still, he put up some good numbers but just below the stats and all-star noms of the remaining 3, so I put him just behind them. That leaves me with 3 co-favourites for one spot, and any of these 3 would be a fine choice. Starting with: The Dark Horse: Gavin Walls - does not have the name recognition of the other 2, and pure reputation carries a lot of weight when voting on all-time best. But I look at his numbers and they speak well to his talent, overall skill set and athleticism. Bigger tackle numbers per games played than the others, and big fumble return yards and TDs speak of his speed off the edge and nose for the ball, and he had more sacks in fewer games (1.5 season's worth) than Mike Gray. Playing in a dead era of Bomber football, devoid of team success, probably sinks his chances to be considered, but he was consistently strong from start to almost finish of his time here. Maybe deserves a better fate than #4 in my ranking, but that is where I put him. The Immaculate: Mike Gray will forever be known for one play. He could live to be 200 years old, and in his obituary the first line will read "The Immaculate Interception". This cuts 2 ways, as it raises his street cred and his profile more than all other players and gives him a voting boost (winning an MVP award in a Grey Cup should count for more when measuring achievements, though), but may hurt him for those who believe he isn't more than that one play. Well, #1 in tackles, #2 in fumble recoveries and Grey Cup appearances, #3 in games played, sacks, and Grey Cups won, and #4 in seasons played put him near the top of most categories when compared to his competition on this list. Never a team nominee for defensive player of the year, but when your competition is Battle, West, Jones, Hill and Payton, just being a known name with that group speaks volumes. Again, only one divisional all-star nod hurts his cause. Depending on my mood, could slot below Walls or ahead of Norman, so split the difference and put him at #3 all-time. The foundation for greatness: Tony Norman - as Speedflex will agree, we are drawn to those we grow up watching first when we look at our perceived "best ever", so like his justifiable promotion of 70's players not to be overlooked, I was weaned on the early '80's stars and have a bias for them. Tony Norman straddled those two eras, and brought the Bomber defence back to prominence as the team returned to glory in 1984. He defined what a rush end should be in that era, and was to the d-line what Jones and Brown were to the linebacking corps at that time. Most sacks by far of any player on this list whose stats were recorded, and shouldn't that be the biggest criteria to consider for a rush end? Had the longevity and sustained success (3 straight all-star nods) to warrant consideration for all-timer. Never "the" superstar, but more than a solid contributor his whole time here. But for all the talent around him, would have had a higher profile as "the leader" on most defences, IMO. And bonus points for officially ending the Eskimo dynasty (his 4th quarter sack, forced fumble, and fumble recovery all on one play against Warren Moon while being double-teamed was one of the most athletic plays I have ever witnessed live, and sealed the 1983 semi-final win against Edmonton and ended their 5 year reign as Grey Cup champions). The early voting seems to favour Norman, and I won't disagree with that sentiment, but if Gray and Gray ended up together, or Gavin Walls snuck in, I'd have no problem with that either. But again, Herb Gray, make it happen. Anything less than #1 in votes is an injustice to him.

Thanks

Is he a defensive tackle or end?

I'll give my full "one man's take" later, but if Herb Gray is not the runaway winner here, I don't know what to say to you people, or why I bothered with this poll in the first place. And he retired before I was born, so I never saw him play. But he is a legendary Bomber figure, so despite the position evolving and the inherent increase in physical skill and size of today's players, it is a crime if he is not on this team. With almost 90 years of history and glory years in the 1960's, we can't just have representation from the 1980's onward on this club. The second player may be a bit of a toss-up, with maybe 2 or 3 co-favorites but possibly 7 in contention jockeying for position. Stay tuned for my analysis.

Here are the bios. Vote for 2 of them: NOTE: Tackles were not recorded before 1987, so any tackle numbers will not be complete for players who played before that year. Sacks were not recorded before 1981, so any sack numbers will not be complete for players who played before that year. Tom Canada – 81 games in 5 seasons (2004-08), 1 int., 45 yards, 1 TD, 6 fumble recoveries, 0 yards, 171 tackles, 41 sacks, 2 time divisional all-star (2004, 07), team nominee Most Outstanding Rookie 2004, team nominee Most Outstanding Defensive player 2007, 2007 Grey Cup appearance Pete Catan – 41 games in 3 seasons (1981-83), 6 fumble recoveries, 26 yards, no tackle stats available, 26.5 sacks, 1982 divisional and CFL all-star, team nominee Most Outstanding Rookie 1981 Herb Gray – 156 games in 10 seasons (1956-65), 2 Int., 21 yards, 2 TD, 12 fumble recoveries, 42 yards, no tackle or sack stats available, 4 time team nominee most outstanding lineman (1957, 59, 60, 63), CFL Most Outstanding Lineman (1960), 7 time divisional all-star (1957-62, 65), 1962 CFL all-star (*first year a league wide all-star award was given in addition to the divisional award), 4 time Grey Cup Champion (1958, 59, 61, 62), 6 Grey Cup appearances (1957-59, 61, 62, 65), CFL Hall of Fame, Blue Bomber defensive player of the half century (1930-80) Michael Gray – 107 games in 7 seasons (1987-93), 9 fumble recoveries, 26 yards, 1 TD, 223 tackles, 43 sacks, 1989 divisional all-star, 1988 Grey Cup defensive MOP, 2 time grey Cup champion (1988, 90) , 4 Grey Cup appearances (1988, 90, 92, 93) Jim Heighton – 125 games in 8 seasons (1970-77), 1 Int., 26 yards, 9 fumble recoveries, 8 yards, 1TD, no tackle or sack totals available, 2 time divisional all-star (1972, 74), team nominee Most Outstanding defensive player 1974, 2 time team nominee Most Outstanding Canadian (1974, 76) Bud Marquandt – no stats available, bio reads: NDSU grad, 7 seasons (1935-41), 3 time divisional all-star (1937, 39, 40) as an end, 3 time Grey Cup champion (1935, 39, 41) Jeff Nicklin – no stats available, his bio reads: born and raised Winnipegger, 7 seasons (1934-40), 4 time divisional all-star (1937-38 as an outside wing, 1939-40 as a flying wing), also played halfback and end, 2 time Grey Cup Champion, military career with Royal Winnipeg Rifles and C.O. of 1st Cdn. Parachute Battalion, one of the first paratroopers who jumped on D-Day, killed in action in 1945, the Jeff Nicklin Memorial trophy is annually awarded to the Most Outstanding Player in the CFL Western Division. Tony Norman – 95 games in 7 seasons (1980-86), 1 Int., 3 yards, 7 fumble recoveries, 46 yards, no tackle totals available, 59 sacks, 3 time divisional all-star (1983-85), 1984 Grey Cup champion Gavin Walls – 82 games in 5 seasons (2005-09), 1 Int., 10 yards, 1 TD, 5 fumble recoveries, 114 yards, 2 TD, 197 tackles, 47 sacks, 3 time divisional all-star (2005,06,08), 2005 team nominee for Most Outstanding defensive player, 2005 CFL Rookie of the Year, 2007 Grey Cup appearance Jamaal Westerman – 47 games in 3 seasons (2015-17), 127 tackles, 32 sacks, 2015 divisional, CFL, and CFLPA all-star, 2015 team nominee for Outstanding Player and Outstanding defensive player, and 2015 Western nominee for outstanding Canadian player Bill Whisler – 108 games in 8 seasons (1962-69), 4 Int., 20 yards, 8 fumble recoveries, 32 yards, no tackle or sack totals available, 4 time divisional all-star (1964, 67-69), 2 time team nominee Most Outstanding Lineman (1964, 67), Grey Cup Champion (1962), 2 Grey Cup appearances (1962, 65) Odell Willis – 43 games in 3 seasons (2009-11), 1 fumble recovery, 0 yards, 67 tackles, 28 sacks, 2010 CFLPA all-star, 2011 divisional and CFL all-star, 2011 Grey Cup appearance

OK, a few hours left to vote on inside linebackers, but declaring Greg Battle and Barrin Simpson as the winners there. Will post the defensive ends now, and put up a list of potential nominees for defensive (nose) tackles next. For the defensive ends, pared the list down to 12. Removed Grant and Korchak from the list as per Stats Junkie's recommendations, also pulled Loyd Lewis and Daved Benefield as they had limited time with the Bombers (one strong season each but no longevity) and much longer careers in many other places, and maybe most controversially pulled Phillip Hunt, who had one monster season with the club and led the league in sacks with 17 (but was nothing more than a team nominee for defensive player and other than the sack totals was not a game changer), but only played a season and a half with the club in total and then headed off to the NFL. One season does not an all-timer make, in my view. There will be 12 to choose from.

Even if a bipartisan bill is passed in both houses, does it not require the President to sign off on? If he refuses to sign a bill agreed to by Republicans that does not include wall funding, what is the next step to get around him (my knowledge of the procedures of US politics is somewhat hazy, need a primer from this guy I guess).

So now that the televised plea and counter-argument have occurred, with the subsequent 2 minute candy meeting and walkout yesterday, what is the next step for each party, and what is the end-game for each? For Trump, he has 2 acceptable options for him it seems. Compromising and backing off his wall is not one of them, and his history of lawsuits as a private businessman suggests that he will drag this out as long as he can and try to bury the other side with deep pockets. Unlike his business days, where he could afford expensive litigation to tire out the other side, the money this time is the lack of paychecks for Government workers, he can outlast them. So he can (a) just ride this out until the other side blinks (does he really care if it kills his chances of re-election, especially if we believe that he never wanted the gig n the first place and this was just a branding experiment gone horribly wrong?), or (b) declare a national emergency and get his funding without compromise. Although funny that it was pointed out (on CNN) that he says he will not declare an emergency as long as he thinks he can work out a deal, but will do so "if the other side proves to be unreasonable", and they raised the proper question "since by definition an emergency is an urgent situation, how can he delay action now and then say later it is an emergency when he has sat on his hands for so long with no change in conditions?" For Democrats, do they have options other than (a) hold fast and watch the workers suffer, hoping they win the PR battle over whose fault it is, or (b) compromise and agree to wall funding to get government open again? Tough sell on option (a) if they keep touting that they are the party wanting to work out this problem. What concessions can they make to show that they are being reasonable without giving in fully? Or do they have a third nuclear option? That being, push hard for impeachment now? They have plenty of ammo to do it already, how would it play out if they now said "on top of everything else, we now have a leader who doesn't want to lead anymore, wants to shut down the government, keep it shut, and walks away from any meeting without any effort to fix the problems of his own making. So if he doesn't want to be a leader, maybe it's time to remove him from office and find someone who does?" Does that ploy work, and could it be their ace in the hole, much like Trump's "emergency funding" ace in the hole? What do Republicans do? It seems they are trying to concoct a new scenario where they offer DACA relief to the Dems like they so long wanted, in exchange for border wall money. This may be seen by the public as the best compromise. The Dems look weak if they give in, but look petty and vindictive with a purely political agenda if they don't take what they have advocated for which is now being offered. It makes them more about beating Trump than solving problems. So thoughts on what the next moves are?

Thanks again for digging through the archives for very useful information. Regarding the changing of stats based on current conventions - I know Elfrid Payton always felt gypped (mildly) about his sack totals because he ended up with 154 to Covington's 157, and the rules changed during Payton's career so that if a QB fumbled when he was hit, they would only record the forced fumble but not a sack, like they did previously. Payton lost a few sacks because he was so good at stripping the ball from the QB when he tackled them. If the QBs were better at protecting the ball, or if the rule was consistent either way, Payton would have the all-time record (either he would have registered more sacks if sack and forced fumble could both happen on the same play, or if Covington lost sacks due to forced fumbles on his plays that counted as both).

The reality of the salary cap makes every team a “budget” team. But take limitations out of the equation - spending to the limit of the cap, does anyone believe that the Jets can sign Laine long term and keep all of their other players? If not, who do you pass up on? Do you have to pass up on more than one player if you keep Laine? And if you trade Laine, does that allow you to keep everyone else? Finally, is it worth it to keep him or trade him, given those questions?

I agree, they can't hope to. But I don't think that they can hope to even with the way they are spending now. That's the point of the argument that a trade for Laine cannot simply be dismissed without considering the cost of keeping him. If Laine commands a salary of $8-10 million per year, and Trouba gets $5.5-8 million, and Morrissey gets $4-6 million, and Wheeler's new $8.25 million kicks in next year, we have added $13-20 million in salary in those 4 alone. Myers and Kulikov off the books cuts $10 million, but we are down 2 d-men now. Our cap space is just over $6 million right now. And we haven't signed Corror or Roslovic yet. So who goes? Laine is a special player, but is he so indispensable to this roster that he is worth keeping at the cost of more than one of the other players, given how this team is currently constructed? Could the loss of his scoring be offset by the other players we keep? I don't have the answer, just opening up the debate, and trying to look at some numbers to focus the issue.

4 hours to go until Trump's speech and it's being reported that he still isn't sure if he's going to declare a national emergency to get around the Congressional stalemate. If his intention was to make a strong move to kneecap the Democrats, this is not it. Seems that he (more likely his advisors) recognize the legal pitfalls of such a move. So right now, expect a more "persuasive" argument to sway public opinion in his favour that the wall is necessary to put the heat back on the Dems, rather than the nuclear option of using his absolute power to bypass them. For the viewing public tuning in to see what crazy things the Don will say, the downside is that this is an Oval Office speech and not a town rally. It is hard to imagine him going off script when the only audience is a camera and no living people in his sightlines to feed his ego, and I'm sure Steven Miller has got tight reins on that script and its message. Not that I don't expect there to be majorly inflammatory rhetoric in it - Miller is by all accounts a reprehensible human being (never met the man, to be as fair as possible) and not so secretly racist, but he is savvy in ways Donald is not, so he can craft a devious message and let his puppet parrot the lines. The Democrats have already booked time for a rebuttal from Schumer and Pelosi right after. Won't be much time to script a response cribbing from Trump's comments, but I don't think that should be their focus. They have so many targets to hit here, the question is: will they do it right? History suggests Democrats don't, because they want to appeal to the humanity in Americans, rather than get dirty and call out the liars and hypocrites for fear of retaliation. IMO, their talking points need to be the following, repeated ad nauseum to frame the counter-attack properly: 1. Trump has lied from the beginning. "Mexico will pay for the wall!" Now, knowing that it was a phony and impossible promise from the beginning, he wants the American taxpayer to pay for his lies, and is willing to hold them hostage (Gov't shutdown putting 800,000 out of work and pay) to get his way, and for months or years, just to get his way. This President will destroy the average American he swore an oath on the Constitution to protect, by putting his own needs ahead of yours as Americans. 2. "I own the shutdown". We all saw these words from his mouth. He has repeated them. Not only does he own it, he is PROUD of it. Proud of putting hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work for his own vanity project, and he will do so for as long as he wants - months to years. This is the man who would protect the average Joe from big Government? 3. Crisis at the border: another LIE. Only 4 terror suspect at the southern border, not 6,000. Vast majority of influx of drugs, terror watch list suspects, and crime comes through legal ports of entry like sea, or moreso, air. And what has the President done to protect our airports. Shutdown the Government, leading to zero pay for TSA agents who have now stopped showing up. Our airports are now less secure, all because of the president. HE has caused the greatest threat to our safety now. [it may be gilding the lily to say "Remember the last time our airspace was compromised by those 19 Saudi hijackers - a country our President still upholds as a vital and important economic trade partner (so we can see whose economic interest he DOES care about, if not 800,000 Americans) despite knowing of the implication of that country's Crown prince in the coldblooded murder of an American citizen and journalist" - that statement could generate a lot of heat, but if you are going to get in a street fight, you have to fight to hurt, I say]. 4. Democrats WANT to fix this problem. Border security is important, which is why we voted to pass 1.6 billion in funding in our last bill, to spend on NECESSARY improvements. The Republicans (McConnell) now refuse to bring that bill to the Senate for a vote. Funny though, they passed the exact same bill two weeks ago 100-0 before the President vetoed it. Now they have fallen in line with the President's position to hold the country hostage until he gets his way. Any soft sell that makes this about being a good country and HELPING in a Humanitarian crisis just washes over Trump's misdeeds and plays into his hands ("see, the Dems agree that this is a crisis"). Experience makes me worry that the Democrats will choose this touchy feely route and lose the message battle.

Before you all dismiss my statement and laugh derisively, perhaps you could each cite a source that says they are pushing the cap and not a mid-level cap team. I'll cite my sources: capgeek.com (when it existed) and capfriendly.com. According to those sites, here is the percentage of the upper limit of cap the Jets have spent to every season since they joined, and where they ranked in the NHL for that year compared to the other teams: 2011-12: 80.7% (could not find ranking) 2012-13: 82.3% (17th of 30 teams) 2013-14: 97.85% (13th of 30 teams) 2014-15: 88.26% (19th of 30 teams) 2015-16: 83.74% (30th of 30 teams) 2016-17: 91.27% (27th of 30 teams) 2017-18: 93.24% (22nd of 31 teams) 2018-19 (projected): 92.90% (20th of 31 teams) Any rebuttals or alternate facts stats anyone wants to come up with?

The discussion on this has been strangely quiet. I really don't want to list 17 candidates. Anyone I missed, or more importantly, who would you pare off of this list?

Let's say for the moment, for argument's sake, that this is not a joke. How would this look? Trading Laine would be a seismic event, no doubt. And were this the old NHL or a Toronto or New York team, this is never happening. The fallout is too great. But we are not in Toronto or New York, and this sure isn't the old NHL. The salary cap era and the reality of small market hockey in Winnipeg dictates that. Don't scoff, the Jets freely admit that at best they can compete as a mid-cap team only - they will never push the upper end of the cap except for a once in a generation run for the Cup, and even then, they won't chase free agents to do it, they'll sacrifice draft and develop for a trade deadline acquisition - they'll chase a Paul Stastny short-term rental but never bid for a John Tavares (or Paul Stastny, for that matter) long term free agent grab as a building block. So why trade a budding superstar? Well, perhaps the track record of "lone superstar" vs. "complete team" negates that star's impact. Ovechkin has his Cup, so that is a ringing endorsement for the superstar route, but let's not forget that prior to finally breaking through after 13 years, he was largely seen as the player who, despite great personal numbers, couldn't win the big one. Washington was synonymous with playoff chokes before last year. The champions were more complete teams with multiple stars (Pittsburgh with Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Kessel, and Fleury, Chicago with Toews, Kane, Seaboook and Keith, or Detroit with Lidstrom, Zetterberg and Datsyuk) and strong cheap support, or a team concept like Boston or LA. So with Wheeler, Scheifele, Byfuglien and Hellebuyck already fitting the "star" mode (or at least the star-sized salaries), do we have room for another? We have all heard that this team cannot stay together in its current iteration due to pending contracts. Is Laine worth more to the team than keeping Kyle Connor? Of course he is. Roslovic? No question. Trouba? Harder to say since the positions they play affect their respective values, but for argument's sake say yes, especially given everyone's fear that Trouba is going anyway. Morrissey? Again, positioning makes it tough to compare apples to oranges, but I think we can agree that Laine can carry this Jets team more than Morrissey can. So debate over, right? Wrong. The debate isn't Laine over any one of these players, it's keeping Laine at the expense of losing MORE THAN ONE of those players. Keep Laine over both Morrissey and Trouba, I say this team is demonstrably worse off. Laine vs. either d-man and both of Connor and Roslovic, or Lowry and/or Tanev and maybe a future free agent signing? I don't think the theory that locking in to Laine for $10 million plus for the next 8 years wipes out our options for building those secondary pieces is that far-fetched. Is Laine the first choice to go, then? We have Scheif and Ehlers on extremely cap-friendly contracts, so they would be equally movable. And Trouba would be a big asset for any other team as well (Morrissey too but less perceived value right now to the average fan), so does it need to be Laine? Well, are you giving up Scheifele to keep Laine? Does Ehlers attract anywhere near the trade value of Laine? Are Wheeler, Little or Byfuglien going to be as attractive as trade bait given their respective ages and contract sizes? And if you lose Trouba and/or Morrissey at the expense of Laine, is the team worse off as a net effect given the defensive deficiencies we would face? The big con to the trade is marketing - Laine is a brand, and he will be worth a lot of money to the franchise as the face of the league (chicks dig the long ball, they say - scoring sells in the NHL, and Brett Hull was much more fun to watch than Adam Oates). But if the bottom line is winning, maybe the superstar trade for the building blocks of a powerhouse team is better. Dallas flipped Hershel Walker for 6 players and earned 3 Super Bowls as a result - Minnesota, not so much. Philly went all in to get Eric Lindros and parlayed it into a sweep at the hands of the Red Wings in 1995, otherwise no glory. The Nordiques, ahem, Avalanche, have 2 Cup banners to show for their efforts in that swap. In the cap era, I'm not sure one superstar can carry a whole team to ultimate glory when all other pieces are sacrificed to keep then there. Let's see if McDavid proves me wrong or right (for now I am winning that race). I'm not saying or advocating that we should trade Laine, but there is at least an argument to be made that it isn't a joke to consider it. The funny thing is we already have a current example of the result of re-signing Laine at all costs, and it is the Maple Leafs. Having married themselves to Tavares and his massive contract, Austin Matthews is no longer the centrepiece of this franchise, and I cannot fathom how those 2 plus Nylander, Marner and Morgan Reilly all stay together much longer once their ELCs run out, much less adding the woefully missing defensive pieces that are needed to round out the team.

One man's take: Greg Battle - best linebacker in Bomber history, inside or outside, bar none. This is a race for #2. So ,who would that be? Armstrong, Clark - good players on great teams, but not in contention. Burkholder, Doyle, Minnick, Walters - cannot judge them fairly as I did not see them play, but their reputations have not survived the years like other greats from the glory years to be considered in my mind. KD Williams - Bob Irving once said "He doesn't quite realize that he could own this town, if he plays his cards right". A supernova when he played with the gold teeth to match his bigger than life persona, but flamed out just as quickly. Not enough consistency to be in the all-time consideration over others. That leaves 4 options for me: Henoc Muamba - A bit too short a stay, maybe some sour grapes for his money grubbing behaviour when he got back from the NFL (and his downgrade in play to boot). He was destined for big things had he stayed, and his Canadian status in a traditionally American position earns him some street cred. Numbers just a shade below the others here, though. Paul Randolph - Big sack totals raise his profile, as does the fact he played on some big teams. Overshadowed by the likes of Battle, West and Payton when he played. Maybe he made them better with his pressure, maybe they aided in his big numbers. Suffers from invisibility because of his company on those teams, and also maybe his numbers are bloated by his longevity. Can't overlook that he never was nominated for an all-star or defensive POY award. That takes him out of the running for me, but an incredibly solid player nonetheless. Aaron Brown - When Ty Jones was the defensive star of the 1984 juggernaut team, Brown was the quiet leader. And he was regarded as better that year, as judged by his team nomination for defensive MOP (his second consecutive). By the slimmest of margins, maybe just because he had so much talent around him, I put him third behind..... Barrin Simpson - Back-to-back all-star seasons, runner-up for league defensive MOP in 2006, and those 2 monster tackle totals in '06 and '07 give him the inside track to line up beside Battle. He carried the defence during his time here with less support around him than others, so he gets my vote.

It is allowing multiple votes, but if you already voted previously you can't go back and add another vote. So if you just want to declare your second vote in the comments, that is fine.

So some names to consider, the older ones are tricky as they are outside wing (playing both ways) so I stand to be corrected if they are in the wrong position. Same goes if I mis-identify a defensive tackle. Jeff Nicklin, Bud Marquandt, Robert "Bud" Korchak, Bud Grant, Herb Gray, Bill Whisler, Jim Heighton, Pete Catan, Tony Norman, Michael Gray, Loyd Lewis, Daved Benefield, Tom Canada, Gavin Walls, Philip Hunt, Odell Willis, Jamaal Westerman This is an overly exhaustive list. Any player mentioned is listed simply because they received an all-star nod or team nomination at some point. Please feel free to say where you do not feel one is worthy of consideration, but try to explain your reasoning.

Yes, pick 2. The poll should allow multiple votes.

OK, a few hours left in the voting, but I am calling it (as I could have 2 minutes after the poll, went up). Jones and West will be the all-timers at outside linebacker, crushing the rest of the field. The inside (middle) linebacker poll is now up, you have a week to decide who suits up beside Greg Battle. I will put out a list of defensive end nominees later tonight, but please submit any names you wish.