TrueBlue4ever

I have never understood how it can be socially acceptable to say "I'm poor" ....I mean, I've been relatively poor when I was in my early 20s, but I can't think of anything more embarrassing to actually admit in public. Honestly. If you can't afford something, then keep quiet about it, but to out-and-out beg for something and say "I'm poor, give me something free or drastically discounted..." ?? I can't imagine something worse... I can think of worse things. Like shaming someone for being poor, and calling them an embarrassment.

That 5 channels thing is a bit of a myth. They have TSN 1, which is just the new name for TSN. TSN 2 is the same as it has been since it was created - secondary programming to complement TSN when two live events are shown at the same time. TSN's 3, 4 and 5 are really just regional channels (for Winnipeg, Ottawa and Montreal) that broadcast the same thing as TSN 95% of the time, and almost always only deviate when there is a local event (Jets, Sens or Habs hockey) shown only in that region (then we get blackouts of TSN 4 and 5). So they really are still only using 2 channels for TSN - the most I've ever seen is 3 different types of events on the different channels that you would consider "national" broadcasts. Kind of a pointless exercise expanding the channels like that, IMO. And despite what TSN and my cable company promised me, I don't get all 5 channels with the same cable subscription I had signed up for when they only had the 2 channels. My former TSN feed has now become TSN 3, and I don't have access to the main network anymore! Fortunately, as noted above, 95% of the time it isn't a problem because they are showing the same thing on 1 and 3 (and 4 and 5 for that matter).

For established players we took from other teams, I'd agree with Morley. For any NI free agent, it would be Lirim Hajrullahu. After all of the kicking woes since Jon Ryan left for the NFL, can't believe he fell into our laps without another team snapping him up.

That's what I was going to say also. It's Bauer's interference with the actual football operations that derailed our team...for a long period of time. Fair points, both of you. And thanks for correcting me on the hiring time frame. My bad.

Im a sucker for family reunion. I hope KW trade for him. Two words - Cauchy Muamba. LOL - we know Jabar Westerman is not Cauchy Muamba Yah, I know, just trying to temper the MBB circle jerk mentality of "his brother is great so he must be great - we have to sign him" that was prevalent when Henoc Muamba was around (or when Brett Cameron was going to be the next CFL all-star punter, so we had to trade up to draft him). Sign him if the skills (and any off-field baggage issues) justify it, not because he shares DNA traits with another player. Family ties do not ensure greatness, just ask Brett Gretzky. Well at the time it wasn't JUST that Henoc was good so people figured Cauchy must be good too, Cauchy was seen as a decent safety as well. He didn't progress and the rest is history but it wasn't just a case of getting a brother here because of the family name. Yes he was.......by Joe Mack. 'Nuff said. by everyone, I swear the amount of revisionist history that goes on around these parts is insane. Speaking of revisionist history, take a look at your old posts on Cauchy. You thought he was anything but decent, citing his inability to think on the field or read defences as his fundamental flaws. But insisting that everyone thought he was decent proves precisely my initial point, that people bought into the myth of Muamba. There was massive speculation that the only reason he was brought in was to entice Henoc to sign a long-term extension and avoid the NFL, which is exactly "a case of getting brother here because of the family name". Mack wouldn't want to admit he'd signed a poor player to a $100,000 dollar contract just to sway his brother while better players were out there, so of course the club sold a bill of goods about how decent he was (Wally Buono letting him walk away scott free notwithstanding). And many posters [you say everyone, but read a few posts down from yours and you'll see at least 5 others (and counting?) who already don't agree] picked up the torch and sang the same song, because they wanted to believe. Wanted to believe that a GM would have some reason other than simply taking a flier on a lousy player as a ploy to keep one other good player from walking. Wanted to believe that he actually was a shrewd judge of talent (I guess we all know how he fared there, don't we?). On a larger scale, wanted to believe in Mack's vision, I guess. Maybe even staked their credibility on it as posters. So they told themselves that he was decent, and not just a stooge brought in to bribe Henoc into staying. At least I really hope so, because if it WAS because Mack (and those posters) truly saw a good player, then that is really telling about how bad he (and those posters) are about assessing talent. The posters I can forgive, because as fans our desire to see everything in its best light because we want the best for OUR team will blind us to uncomfortable truths at times. But a GM whose sole job it is to build a winner, not so much. Now personally, Westerman the BC player would intrigue me. Frankly, he has since Buono schooled us at the draft and moved up to take him, leaving us to pretend we wanted lame duck Tyson Pencer all along. Westerman the personality, who clearly has run afoul of the system somewhere along the line, not so keen on. But hopefully any interested organization will vett him properly, and not just look at the last name on his jersey. So ultimately just trying to prevent people who want that "family reunion" from diving down the rabbit hole again and buying the hype that the lineage means everything. You're welcome. P.S. Just curious, where is Brett Cameron these days? Lost track of his movements after he got out of the glare of his father's legacy spotlight at training camp in Bomberland.

Bauer is also the reason we even had a team after the Reinbold years left us teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. His strong-arming of creditors to forgive $5 million in loans saved the team from dying, so given the choice of team or no team at all, those other sins seem a lot easier to forgive, no? He is also the reason Ritchie was here in the first place, and coaches are ultimately hired to be fired, so a saw-off there in my opinion. I heard Ritchie had created a split in the locker room between "his guys" (rumoured to be the more religious types, and those who had Sunday dinners at his place, or something crazy like that) and "the outsiders" on the team. What role Bauer played in squashing that, or directing him out the door, I won't speculate on, so I'll take your word for it. His blight will certainly be forcing out Doug Berry to personally hand Mike Kelly a head coaching job and essentially the keys to the whole shop, which then forced out Taman as collateral damage, and then bolted himself when it went south. THAT is much harder to forgive given how it all turned out for the Bombers (and Taman too) in hindsight. But he inherited a gawd-awful team (on the field) AND franchise (off it), salvaged them both, and at least kept the off-field half of it from falling back into serious disrepair on his way out. So I can give him a lifetime pass for saving the franchise from financial ruin, although sometimes I'll say his name through clenched teeth when the phrase "handled internally, next question" comes up.

Im a sucker for family reunion. I hope KW trade for him. Two words - Cauchy Muamba. LOL - we know Jabar Westerman is not Cauchy Muamba Yah, I know, just trying to temper the MBB circle jerk mentality of "his brother is great so he must be great - we have to sign him" that was prevalent when Henoc Muamba was around (or when Brett Cameron was going to be the next CFL all-star punter, so we had to trade up to draft him). Sign him if the skills (and any off-field baggage issues) justify it, not because he shares DNA traits with another player. Family ties do not ensure greatness, just ask Brett Gretzky. Well at the time it wasn't JUST that Henoc was good so people figured Cauchy must be good too, Cauchy was seen as a decent safety as well. He didn't progress and the rest is history but it wasn't just a case of getting a brother here because of the family name. Yes he was.......by Joe Mack. 'Nuff said.

Simple math, there are 9 teams so one team has to sit out each week, since we play each team twice (at least) every team gets 2 byes over the course of the year. Impossible to eliminate one bye per team unless the schedule has that goofy "sandwich a third game mid-week between the 2 normal weekend games" stretch and make every CFL team do it. Sure, if you want to give it more than a passing thought then it's easy to find flaws... Yep, I'm the jackass who points out when people make predictions for the teams' records for the season and the wins and losses don't equal out.

Im a sucker for family reunion. I hope KW trade for him. Two words - Cauchy Muamba. LOL - we know Jabar Westerman is not Cauchy Muamba Yah, I know, just trying to temper the MBB circle jerk mentality of "his brother is great so he must be great - we have to sign him" that was prevalent when Henoc Muamba was around (or when Brett Cameron was going to be the next CFL all-star punter, so we had to trade up to draft him). Sign him if the skills (and any off-field baggage issues) justify it, not because he shares DNA traits with another player. Family ties do not ensure greatness, just ask Brent Gretzky.

Simple math, there are 9 teams so one team has to sit out each week, since we play each team twice (at least) every team gets 2 byes over the course of the year. Impossible to eliminate one bye per team unless the schedule has that goofy "sandwich a third game mid-week between the 2 normal weekend games" stretch and make every CFL team do it. Easiest way to shorten the season and keep a reasonable schedule with reasonable rest (i.e. 6-8 days) between games: shorten the season to 16 games. Every team plays every team twice (one home, one road) and gets 2 byes. 18 week schedule instead of 20. Season starts Canada Day week (last game of the week played no later than July 1), Labour Day week therefore is week 10, regular season is done before Halloween, playoffs end no later than November 18 every year. This is how it was before 1986 (they actually had 4 pre-season games then too, but it was felt that 4 exhibition games were too many and weren't profitable enough to justify the expense). Of course, extra "real" games mean extra revenue, so the league will not ever want to shorten the schedule back to 16.

Im a sucker for family reunion. I hope KW trade for him. Two words - Cauchy Muamba.

So do Portis and Yantz. I'd wager $10 million of Yourface's internet dollars that we won't see all 5 QB's play on Friday.

Damage control, perhaps? More likely "can you believe what the stupid people on the internet are saying? Let's put that to rest" Even more likely "can you believe what my stupid agent let slip before the season while I still have a year left on my contract? Better do some damage control and try to put this to rest before cuts come". Either Marve wants out and his agent is passing on that truth to the club, the agent spoke out of turn without Marve's knowledge, or Marve's agent tried to use the NFL ploy to leverage a bigger number from the Bombers, who didn't bite. Whatever the circumstance, the story that has gotten out is that Marve's plan for now is to bolt at year's end. If true, then the club has to ask itself if it is going to use a third string QB roster spot on a non-project who won't be at camp next year even if he fails in the NFL (since their camp won't go until late summer, he is not here in 2016 regardless). If false, then this is definitely damage control by Marve since he hasn't been handed the back-up spot that some here believe is (and maybe he expected should be) his and not Brohm's. Good digging M.O.A.B.

And others are acting like Marve should be considered the starter for the Bombers now. My point is simply: A) the noise out of camp from the media is that Brohm is the clear #2, both in how he's performed (although some posters here see things quite differently from their viewpoint at practice - I'm not going to say which assessment is the more accurate one), and in what the intentions of the coaching staff are (at least how the media have portrayed it so far), so Marve is at best the #3, which usually is reserved for a developmental future project and not a player intended to supplant the current starter by week 9, and whether or not he fails in the NFL, his intention NOW is that he doesn't want to stay and play in Winnipeg, even though his contract says he can't go anywhere else for this year, so one has to wonder if that lack of desire to be here will keep him from wanting to return to Winnipeg as a free agent after a failed NFL run. I have little faith that Marve will score an NFL spot, but if his attitude is that the Bombers are not his priority, why keep him holding a clipboard this year over a QB who will be invested in growing his game with the team beyond this season? Sorry, that smiley face should be a capital b with parentheses. Stupid emoticons!

And others are acting like Marve should be considered the starter for the Bombers now. My point is simply: A) the noise out of camp from the media is that Brohm is the clear #2, both in how he's performed (although some posters here see things quite differently from their viewpoint at practice - I'm not going to say which assessment is the more accurate one), and in what the intentions of the coaching staff are (at least how the media have portrayed it so far), so Marve is at best the #3, which usually is reserved for a developmental future project and not a player intended to supplant the current starter by week 9, and whether or not he fails in the NFL, his intention NOW is that he doesn't want to stay and play in Winnipeg, even though his contract says he can't go anywhere else for this year, so one has to wonder if that lack of desire to be here will keep him from wanting to return to Winnipeg as a free agent after a failed NFL run. I have little faith that Marve will score an NFL spot, but if his attitude is that the Bombers are not his priority, why keep him holding a clipboard this year over a QB who will be invested in growing his game with the team beyond this season?

For all the love Marve gets on this board, the repeated message from the media and what the coaches tell them is that Brohm has basically been locked into the #2 position barring some major collapse, and with Marve flat out saying he's leaving for the NFL next year, I can't fathom the club using up what amounts to a developmental roster spot on a guy who wants to bolt at season's end. I know his scrambling and enthusiasm score big on the emotional love scale from the fans, but keeping him doesn't seem to be the logical move unless he's the clear #2 and pushing for top spot, which by all accounts from those who make the decisions, he isn't.

I've heard it on the radio (either the talking heads / Bauming on 1290 or Irving) mention that Richards had dealt with concussions playing university ball .. not saying that's what this injury is .. have no idea what's keeping him out of the lineup to be honest .. but I have heard similar things. How could he have gotten a concussion after 2 days of rookie camp? Again, I'm not suggesting that this IS what it is .. just confirming that I've heard he's dealt with this in the past .. that said, concussions are tricky things .. if you have a history of concussions .. something seemingly innocuous can trigger symptoms .. but the kicker is that every person responds differently .. hell, it's not even big shots that guys have to worry about .. it's repeated small blows that add up, over time, that cause damage. I *WILL* repeat myself .. not suggesting Richards is dealing with a concussion .. just confirming that I've heard the same thing as another poster. I heard one reporter (think it was Tait, but possibly Wiecek) on the radio saying that he wasn't even participating in stationary catching drills for 4-5 days, then getting only underhand tosses from Howell, and it struck the reporter that this looked suspiciously like he was going through the week-long post-concussion protocol regimen. Again, only second-hand heresay, so take that for its limited worth.

I'm not sure how I feel. I understand your point of view but I also believe that the CFL and NFL have been less than responsible when it comes to brain injuries and they should have to answer for that. I see your point as well. But these guys know that concussions are an issue in this sport. And most guys don't have the patience to wait until their completely healed before they go back onto the field, because they just want to get back out there. At the same time, if the doctor is saying you're cleared to play, then that's wrong as well. But you can't put all the blame on them. But suing for $200 million? Even $100 million would ruin the CFL, and pretty much ruin the careers of all current and future football players, coaches, etc... The issues need to be addressed, but suing the league is not the way to fix the issue. It's a way to line your pockets. Banks isn't looking out for anyone else but himself. It's a class-action lawsuit, he is just leading it. In a way, he is actually sticking his neck out for the benefit of possibly hundreds of players. If the guy leading a class action suit has no class and doesn't see any action, I don't see this going very far. If Matt Dunigan signed on to this lawsuit, would opinions around here change?

Our media is embarrassing. Holy hell.I'm comfortable putting a twenty down it was Weicek.I couldn't see who asked the question, but it sounded like Bauming, which would surprise me because he's usually on the ball. But could have been someone else too.Sonofa...great. Well June's as good a month as any to ration diapers. Let the baby dookie on the lawn. If he's going to try and flip blame for his screw-up on the Bombers, why not make a crack that he's not used to having learn the names of more than 7 coaches.I asked Bauming about it on Twitter and it was him. I sure hope he thanked you after you asked that question. So, mbrg, when can I expect that twenty? Weekend is here, you know.

The Banjo Bowl game was not as close as the score indicates. The 'Riders were up 27-8 at the half as a result of a blocked field goal touchdown return and a Dressler punt return TD because of an absolutely brutal missed call by the refs on a blatant hold. The Bombers only got back into it when Durant got knocked out with the elbow injury. But the 'Riders exposed the bad o-line (5 sacks) and weak run defence (196 yards, 6.3 yards per carry) that gave every other team a blueprint on how to beat Winnipeg for the rest of the year. Only a late fumble gave the Bombers a chance to steal the win, but Willy threw deep on first down and overthrew the receiver for an INT. Another late turnover gave him another shot, but this pass was even more forced and another INT. To be fair, he was being rushed all second half on his passes due to poor protection, but those throws were on him (which he admitted afterwards). Hopefully he won't be shell-shocked from all of the hits he took last year and he will display the patience he showed in the early comeback wins, and it goes without saying the line protection needs to be 100% better this year to give him any chance. Sounds to me like you described a close game.... It doesn't matter that the Riders were up at half time, this is the CFL, we've seen it countless times where one team can come out hard at first but then the game winds up close. Games are 60 minutes long for a reason. The run D problems were only really a problem on Labour Day. For all the rushing yards in the other games the Riders didn't have much to show for it and it was Bomber turnovers on offense or special teams play that did more damage on the scoreboard than the Riders running the ball. Run D was a problem against Saskatchewan all year, and their success gave other teams a simple game plan to beat us the rest of the way throughout the season. Don't equate rushing TD's as the only measure of success in a run game. Ability to control the clock, wear down the defence, keep the opposing team's offence off the field, and physically and psychologically beat down the opponent with a power game by controlling the line of scrimmage battle. And as for the 'Riders "not having much to show for" all of their rushing yards, they did have 3 wins and 0 losses against Winnipeg last year to show for it, so there's that. Actually, in terms of yards allowed, the Labour Day game was the Bombers best against the 'Riders. The stats for the year bear out the argument that Saskatchewan exposed the Bomber run game and other teams followed suit after that as a simple game plan to follow to beat us. Week 1 vs Tor: 42 yards/8 carries (5.25 avg.) Week 2 vs Ott: 86 yards/18 carries (4.78 avg.) Week 3 at Mtl: 102 yards/22 carries (4.64 avg.) Week 4 vs Edm: 192 yards/30 carries (6.40 avg.) - NOTE: QB Mike Reilly accounted for 96 of those yards Week 5 at BC: 100 yards/20 carries (5.00 avg.) Week 6 at Ham: 49 yards/12 carries (4.08 avg.) Week 7 vs Sask: 186 yards/29 carries (6.41 avg.) Week 8 at Tor: 174 yards/25 carries (6.96 avg.) Week 9 vs Mtl: 91 yards/25 carries (3.64 avg.) Week 10 at Sask: 160 yards/29 carries (5.52 avg.) Week 11 vs Sask: 196 yards/31 carries (6.32 avg.) Week 12 at BC: 163 yards/26 carries (6.27 avg.) Week 14 vs Ham: 58 yards/11 carries (5.27 avg.) Week 15 at Ott: 188 yards/24 carries (7.83 avg.) Week 16 at Edm: 155 yards/29 carries (5.34 avg.) Week 17 vs Cal: 195 yards/30 carries (6.50 avg.) Week 18 vs BC: 95 yards/28 carries (3.39 avg.) Week 19 at Cal: 217 yards/24 carries (9.04 avg.) Saying that run D was only a problem in the Labour Day game is shortsighted, in my view.

And this is why, even though I'll defend Joe Mack in a lot of areas, I will always say his greatest flaw was hiring coaches... I will disagree strongly here. I'm not going to jump up and down and praise Tim Burke, so no one try to twist my words here, but remember that he was handed the position as head coach after LaPolice was fired. He was not hired to be the head coach, he inherited the position, and as the defensive coach many of the same posters on this board who rip him now loved him and felt he should take over from LaPolice before the firing occurred. He was handed a sinking ship by an obstinate GM who bristled at any perceived or actual criticism (true story: I was invited to a pre-season Bomber luncheon where Bob Irving was emceeing and he referenced the struggles of the 2012 season to the crowd and said "Good luck Joe Mack, hopefully we'll see better times ahead this year". Mack barked back "Gee, thanks, Bob" in the most dismissive, sarcastic way he could, and then under his breath - but not so quietly that I couldn't hear him the next table over - something that sounded a lot like "glass bowl") and stubbornly held to the belief that his way, which was opposite to everyone else's thinking, had to be the right way. Burke had seen Mack throw LaPo under the bus for his failed roster, saw the players assembled by Mack not giving any effort, and decided to preserve his own future career by calling out those lazy players. Unprofessional, sure, but it was in keeping with the whole tone of the organization at that time. A Bomber beat reporter went into the locker room after a tough loss just before the week long bye (this was I believe just before LaPo got the axe) and said that 25% percent of the players were upset about the loss, 25% were laughing and goofing off, talking about where they were going to go drinking that night, and 50% had their packed bags with them and were talking about their plans for the week off starting that minute. That tells you a lot about the attitude and commitment of that team right there. That assembling of "talent" falls on Joe Mack and Joe Mack alone, who though bringing in "athletes" and not football players was the way to build a team. Burke did not rise above that mess, for sure, but that does not make him anywhere near "the worst Bomber coach by far". It just makes him an astute judge of player talent and character (or lack thereof in this case) who recognized that he was next to get thrown under the bus by his GM and refused to roll over and die, but instead called out those players (and by extension, his GM) to keep alive the hope of coaching in the future. That stance, however unseemly, got him re-hired in Montreal. The stink of that Bomber regime will forever rest on the shoulders of Joe Mack. But, as was so eloquently put by saskbluefan 2 years ago in another post: "The thing is there are a lot of people on this board with so much credibility capital wrapped up in Joe Mack that they can't admit what a dog of a roster this is. So whatever shortcomings Burke may have need to be blown 10x out of proportion in order to blame him rather then the lack of talent on this team for the disaster this year has become." And I'd put Mack's flaws in drafting, player assessment, letting free agents walk, failure to stockpile Canadian talent, inability to find a long term solution at quarterback or a back-up plan in place in the event of a Buck Pierce injury, and his overall refusal to learn from his own mistakes ahead of his acumen in hiring coaches. But we can agree to disagree.

The Banjo Bowl game was not as close as the score indicates. The 'Riders were up 27-8 at the half as a result of a blocked field goal touchdown return and a Dressler punt return TD because of an absolutely brutal missed call by the refs on a blatant hold. The Bombers only got back into it when Durant got knocked out with the elbow injury. But the 'Riders exposed the bad o-line (5 sacks) and weak run defence (196 yards, 6.3 yards per carry) that gave every other team a blueprint on how to beat Winnipeg for the rest of the year. Only a late fumble gave the Bombers a chance to steal the win, but Willy threw deep on first down and overthrew the receiver for an INT. Another late turnover gave him another shot, but this pass was even more forced and another INT. To be fair, he was being rushed all second half on his passes due to poor protection, but those throws were on him (which he admitted afterwards). Hopefully he won't be shell-shocked from all of the hits he took last year and he will display the patience he showed in the early comeback wins, and it goes without saying the line protection needs to be 100% better this year to give him any chance.

Anyone not attend camp today but want to invent a report? I'd be game to. But how do I change my username to "Tuscaloosa Blue?"

Bloggers are the most self important people out there. Really hard to read. I assume gbill has one.... That sounded like a shot. Was that a shot? Because it sure seems like a shot. Not a backfire but an honest to goodness shot. Don't worry. I'm sure our moderators will apply the rules of code of conduct they established and properly and appropriately admonish the offending parties.

In terms of specifically losing every game for an entire half of a season, it's happened twice in the club's 84 year history. In 1964 the team started 1-1-1 before losing 13 straight to finish off the season, so obviously went 0-8 in the second half of the year. In 1998 the club started the season 0-10 and finished at 3-15 overall. Last year we were close on both halves of the season, going 1-8 in the first half and 2-7 in the back half, but the other "almost" year was 1989, when we were 7-4 before losing 7 straight to finish off the regular season (we then won a playoff game before losing to the Tiger Cats in the eastern Final).