TrueBlue4ever

My original picks were:
BC 13-5
Calgary 13-5 (2nd)
Edmonton 10-8
Winnipeg 10-8 (4th)
Saskatchewan 3-15
Hamilton 11-7
Ottawa 8-10
Montreal 7-11
Toronto 6-12
 
After week 1 I see no need to change that order, those were my picks and right or wrong it is goofy to change them after week 1. If we are allowed to adjust our rankings based on a do-over after seeing the teams play, I reserve the right to re-visit my picks after week 18.
However, some general thoughts about things I may have underappreciated in my original analysis before this past week:
BC - still think their offence will be scary good, and they will play in a few 45-40 games, but if they do not get a better showing from their o-line, Jennings may not have the steamboats to have the MOP season I predicted. He was pressured a ridiculous 51% of his plays last game. Losing Olafioye may be a bigger loss than I imagined it would be. But with Wally as your coach, the defence could easily be repaired and be a force by season's end. This team may be like the 2011 team that started badly but was a juggernaut by season's end.
Calgary - Looked out of sorts for 3 quarters, then blew it in OT to settle for the tie. Still an excellent football team, just won't be as good as last year. Their season will be solely judged on what happens in the playoffs. And I think it may be more that Ottawa matches well against them and is in their heads rather than a regression as a whole.
Edmonton - I wasn't sure if we'd get good Edm. or bad Edm. this year. The first game suggests more than just good, and if those receivers not named Bowman do all year what they did in week 1, this might be the offence all teams fear. However, losing Sherritt (any word if it is season-ending yet? Sure looked that way - EDIT: Yep, done for the year) on top of the pre-season loss of Greenwood and that LB position looks vulnerable, so they may still be a near .500 team if they can't patch that defensive hole.
Winnipeg - I don't think a win in Saskatchewan means they'll do better than the 10-8 I have them pegged for, or a loss means they'll do worse. So no reason for me to change my view of them or my concerns about the defensive side of the ball yet. I shudder to think how likely it could be that they lose in Regina on Saturday (on paper they are more talented and the 'Riders did nothing to show me they are going to be strong this year, but is anyone shocked if the Bombers don't lay an egg in front of an emotional Mosaic crowd yet again, and the stadium opener will have the same feel as Labour Day I'll bet, so watch out) 
Saskatchewan - So Kevin Glenn looked better than I thought he might, and maybe saying 3 wins was low-balling it, but they still did lose, and did not look great for long stretches despite giving away a game they should have one if not for their crap(igna) kicker. They may be a hard-luck team in some ways this year, but I sense a mutiny both among the fans and the players if Jones gets out to an 0-3, 0-4 start, and the year will be lost early.
Hamilton - Don't hurt your ankles jumping off the bandwagon, folks. One loss, and now they are going to be in the 3-15 to 6-12 range?? I don't think so folks. However, the injury bug has struck again, and that  o-line gave Collaros no time far too often (and he played the short passing game too much - looked like Ricky Ray mentality for a QB who loved stretching defences with the quick long strike in the past). So maybe I'll dial back the 11-7 pick, but still think they can be the best in the east this year.
Ottawa - Not sure if this is really how good the team is, or if Calgary just brings the best out of them. The rematch in Cowtown may temper people's enthusiasm about them. Not ready to give them credit for being a better than .500 team yet, but this might be the team that I have flipped my opinion by week 5 if they play more games like last week.
Montreal - Played just like I suspected - not well, but got a win. And they will surprise teams early and have a better record than their play. And it will catch up to them by mid-season (that was my take before, and I'll stand by it now). If anything, I may have over-estimated Darian Durant's ability if game 1 is an indication. He did not look that good (certainly not good enough to talk trash at the Sask. bench after an undeserved win). I may have been mistaken giving them 3rd in the East. THIS JUST IN: They signed Drew Willy today, and that just reinforces how mediocre I think they are rather than improves their their roster depth.
Toronto - OK, this team has driven me nuts for years in my football pool, and they continue to do so. I even joked when picking the Tabbies this weekend "Now watch Toronto do something stupid like win 38-14 and get me overconfident and believing in them going forward, then they'll lose 4 out of 5." When I think they should win, they lose, when I think they should lose, they win, and when I change my pick at the last minute to compensate for my initial thoughts which are always wrong, they go ahead and punish me for changing that pick by doing what I thought they'd do in the first place. But Mark Trestman has a way with veteran QB's and no way I thought Ray had half the game in him that he showed on Sunday. And the score should have been much, much higher but for those end zone drops, but those receivers looked really good otherwise. And no way I saw that defence performing the way they did with all those blitzes. So if I'm going to make one knee-jerk reaction and flip-flop after one game, this team would be the one to do it on. Maybe they can challenge for a playoff spot and wreck the crossover prediction I had. But I'll hold off on that until at least week 4.

My original picks were:
BC 13-5
Calgary 13-5 (2nd)
Edmonton 10-8
Winnipeg 10-8 (4th)
Saskatchewan 3-15
Hamilton 11-7
Ottawa 8-10
Montreal 7-11
Toronto 6-12
 
After week 1 I see no need to change that order, those were my picks and right or wrong it is goofy to change them after week 1. If we are allowed to adjust our rankings based on a do-over after seeing the teams play, I reserve the right to re-visit my picks after week 18.
However, some general thoughts about things I may have underappreciated in my original analysis before this past week:
BC - still think their offence will be scary good, and they will play in a few 45-40 games, but if they do not get a better showing from their o-line, Jennings may not have the steamboats to have the MOP season I predicted. He was pressured a ridiculous 51% of his plays last game. Losing Olafioye may be a bigger loss than I imagined it would be. But with Wally as your coach, the defence could easily be repaired and be a force by season's end. This team may be like the 2011 team that started badly but was a juggernaut by season's end.
Calgary - Looked out of sorts for 3 quarters, then blew it in OT to settle for the tie. Still an excellent football team, just won't be as good as last year. Their season will be solely judged on what happens in the playoffs. And I think it may be more that Ottawa matches well against them and is in their heads rather than a regression as a whole.
Edmonton - I wasn't sure if we'd get good Edm. or bad Edm. this year. The first game suggests more than just good, and if those receivers not named Bowman do all year what they did in week 1, this might be the offence all teams fear. However, losing Sherritt (any word if it is season-ending yet? Sure looked that way - EDIT: Yep, done for the year) on top of the pre-season loss of Greenwood and that LB position looks vulnerable, so they may still be a near .500 team if they can't patch that defensive hole.
Winnipeg - I don't think a win in Saskatchewan means they'll do better than the 10-8 I have them pegged for, or a loss means they'll do worse. So no reason for me to change my view of them or my concerns about the defensive side of the ball yet. I shudder to think how likely it could be that they lose in Regina on Saturday (on paper they are more talented and the 'Riders did nothing to show me they are going to be strong this year, but is anyone shocked if the Bombers don't lay an egg in front of an emotional Mosaic crowd yet again, and the stadium opener will have the same feel as Labour Day I'll bet, so watch out) 
Saskatchewan - So Kevin Glenn looked better than I thought he might, and maybe saying 3 wins was low-balling it, but they still did lose, and did not look great for long stretches despite giving away a game they should have one if not for their crap(igna) kicker. They may be a hard-luck team in some ways this year, but I sense a mutiny both among the fans and the players if Jones gets out to an 0-3, 0-4 start, and the year will be lost early.
Hamilton - Don't hurt your ankles jumping off the bandwagon, folks. One loss, and now they are going to be in the 3-15 to 6-12 range?? I don't think so folks. However, the injury bug has struck again, and that  o-line gave Collaros no time far too often (and he played the short passing game too much - looked like Ricky Ray mentality for a QB who loved stretching defences with the quick long strike in the past). So maybe I'll dial back the 11-7 pick, but still think they can be the best in the east this year.
Ottawa - Not sure if this is really how good the team is, or if Calgary just brings the best out of them. The rematch in Cowtown may temper people's enthusiasm about them. Not ready to give them credit for being a better than .500 team yet, but this might be the team that I have flipped my opinion by week 5 if they play more games like last week.
Montreal - Played just like I suspected - not well, but got a win. And they will surprise teams early and have a better record than their play. And it will catch up to them by mid-season (that was my take before, and I'll stand by it now). If anything, I may have over-estimated Darian Durant's ability if game 1 is an indication. He did not look that good (certainly not good enough to talk trash at the Sask. bench after an undeserved win). I may have been mistaken giving them 3rd in the East. THIS JUST IN: They signed Drew Willy today, and that just reinforces how mediocre I think they are rather than improves their their roster depth.
Toronto - OK, this team has driven me nuts for years in my football pool, and they continue to do so. I even joked when picking the Tabbies this weekend "Now watch Toronto do something stupid like win 38-14 and get me overconfident and believing in them going forward, then they'll lose 4 out of 5." When I think they should win, they lose, when I think they should lose, they win, and when I change my pick at the last minute to compensate for my initial thoughts which are always wrong, they go ahead and punish me for changing that pick by doing what I thought they'd do in the first place. But Mark Trestman has a way with veteran QB's and no way I thought Ray had half the game in him that he showed on Sunday. And the score should have been much, much higher but for those end zone drops, but those receivers looked really good otherwise. And no way I saw that defence performing the way they did with all those blitzes. So if I'm going to make one knee-jerk reaction and flip-flop after one game, this team would be the one to do it on. Maybe they can challenge for a playoff spot and wreck the crossover prediction I had. But I'll hold off on that until at least week 4.

The Jets are in no way giving up on Hellebuyck yet. He has dominated at every level he has played prior to the NHL, and was thrown into the fire 2 years ago when he could have had more seasoning in the minors. The Jets don't want a new #1 to replace him, they want a veteran goalie who can be a safety valve starter for 2-3 years if Hellebuyck craps out, or who can groom Hellebuyck to be the full-time starter by year 3. And Comrie is even more highly valued in the minors, but they don't want to rush him too. So going after the same type of young goalie to become the full-time starter is pointless unless they have already decided that Hellebuyck can't cut it. So goalies like Raanta and Grubauer (and Scott Darling before them) don't fit that profile. With Fleury and Bishop off the market, in my opinion the fit the Jets want is a Steve Mason or a Brian Elliott, who can be the starter for sure if needed but won't carry a 60-65 game load, but rather split duties and play 40-45 games while "coaching" the younger goalie, and will sign shorter term rather than demand a 6 year contract with a promise of being "the guy" for the next half decade. Elliott did well in St. Louis with a lighter workload splitting time with Jake Allen (and before him Jaroslav Halak).

The Jets are in no way giving up on Hellebuyck yet. He has dominated at every level he has played prior to the NHL, and was thrown into the fire 2 years ago when he could have had more seasoning in the minors. The Jets don't want a new #1 to replace him, they want a veteran goalie who can be a safety valve starter for 2-3 years if Hellebuyck craps out, or who can groom Hellebuyck to be the full-time starter by year 3. And Comrie is even more highly valued in the minors, but they don't want to rush him too. So going after the same type of young goalie to become the full-time starter is pointless unless they have already decided that Hellebuyck can't cut it. So goalies like Raanta and Grubauer (and Scott Darling before them) don't fit that profile. With Fleury and Bishop off the market, in my opinion the fit the Jets want is a Steve Mason or a Brian Elliott, who can be the starter for sure if needed but won't carry a 60-65 game load, but rather split duties and play 40-45 games while "coaching" the younger goalie, and will sign shorter term rather than demand a 6 year contract with a promise of being "the guy" for the next half decade. Elliott did well in St. Louis with a lighter workload splitting time with Jake Allen (and before him Jaroslav Halak).

The Jets are in no way giving up on Hellebuyck yet. He has dominated at every level he has played prior to the NHL, and was thrown into the fire 2 years ago when he could have had more seasoning in the minors. The Jets don't want a new #1 to replace him, they want a veteran goalie who can be a safety valve starter for 2-3 years if Hellebuyck craps out, or who can groom Hellebuyck to be the full-time starter by year 3. And Comrie is even more highly valued in the minors, but they don't want to rush him too. So going after the same type of young goalie to become the full-time starter is pointless unless they have already decided that Hellebuyck can't cut it. So goalies like Raanta and Grubauer (and Scott Darling before them) don't fit that profile. With Fleury and Bishop off the market, in my opinion the fit the Jets want is a Steve Mason or a Brian Elliott, who can be the starter for sure if needed but won't carry a 60-65 game load, but rather split duties and play 40-45 games while "coaching" the younger goalie, and will sign shorter term rather than demand a 6 year contract with a promise of being "the guy" for the next half decade. Elliott did well in St. Louis with a lighter workload splitting time with Jake Allen (and before him Jaroslav Halak).

Your definition of "marginal player" seems largely justified by "Vegas didn't pick them so that proves their lack of value". By that logic the following players are "marginal" too since Vegas didn't pick any of them either (to name but a few):
Matt Dumba, Marco Scandella, Eric Staal, Antii Raanta, Sami Vatanen, Brock Nelson, Ryan Strome, Kevin Shattenkirk, Patrick Sharp

Your definition of "marginal player" seems largely justified by "Vegas didn't pick them so that proves their lack of value". By that logic the following players are "marginal" too since Vegas didn't pick any of them either (to name but a few):
Matt Dumba, Marco Scandella, Eric Staal, Antii Raanta, Sami Vatanen, Brock Nelson, Ryan Strome, Kevin Shattenkirk, Patrick Sharp

Your definition of "marginal player" seems largely justified by "Vegas didn't pick them so that proves their lack of value". By that logic the following players are "marginal" too since Vegas didn't pick any of them either (to name but a few):
Matt Dumba, Marco Scandella, Eric Staal, Antii Raanta, Sami Vatanen, Brock Nelson, Ryan Strome, Kevin Shattenkirk, Patrick Sharp

OK, now that pre-season is done it seems more appropriate to make a guess.
BC - Scary good offence this year with Chris Williams added to the receiving mix and three deadly return specialists. Jennings is the ridiculously early pick for league MOP. Could see a few 45-40 games from them. But Wally will have their defence prepared too. Bit of a gut pick but I say 13-5 and first.
Calgary - Nowhere to go but down, but dropping from the summit of Everest to base camp still has you well above the clouds most days. Not sure I buy the whole "this year is about redemption for last year's Grey Cup, so we are motivated every single time out" angle. More likely they pace themselves and give up a few more games in the regular season. 13-5 but second in the division (or 12-6, see Edmonton)
Edmonton - The wildcard of the West. Are they the team that ended the season strong or the one that started off poorly? What does Ed Hervey's late firing do - eliminate or create a distraction? Is Mike Reilly ready to take a run at league MOP or is he going to become labeled "the next glass QB"? Not too sure about them, guess this is my way of saying they could challenge for 1st (more likely 2nd) or could languish back in 4th in the division with a losing record, and neither outcome would surprise me. Just have a hunch they will rebound this year and be better (if not totally reflected in their win-loss record, at least in their divisional standing) 10-8 but third (or 11-7, give them one more win and Calgary one more loss)
Winnipeg - Lots to be excited for as a Bomber fan, but the bar has been so low the last decade that 2 straight winning seasons qualifies for a parade in these parts at this point (which is kind of sad when you think about it). Nicholls showed he can win games (10-3 as a starter is an overlooked stat by many) but except for the division semi against BC, his passing numbers didn't jump off the page. Good game manager, and Winnipeg's run game may be the best in the CFL this year with that o-line and the Harris-Flanders combo. And that undersized receiving corps can still make plays. But about that defence ..... so we brought in two d-lineman with big sack numbers to bring more pressure - sounds like a carbon copy of last year. And Mo Leggett may be hurt to start the year, so the same problems could arise at linebacker. Hurl was not good enough 2 years ago and got bumped by Bass, why would he be an upgrade now? Bottom line, unless Richie Hall's "rush only 4 every time and bend don't break" schemes don't change, I have little hope that our overall defence will look better than last year. And don't know how Medlock can improve on last year's performance which was the difference between winning and losing in at least a half dozen games. They'll do OK, maybe be even pretty good, but the West is so stacked I think it adds up to 4th spot. Hope to be proven wrong. 10-8.
Saskatchewan - If Vince Young actually made the roster and was anointed the starter, I would be waxing poetic about historic futility with this team (like 2003 Hamilton 1-17 futility), but Kevin Glenn has been around long enough to be a better regular season QB and pull a rabbit out of his hat once in a while to translate into a few more wins. And that receiving corps could keep them in a few games. However, it would require their o-line to actually give him time to throw, and his mobility is not what it used to be (not that it was ever his best feature). And too much overhaul by Chris Jones with no return on his gambles, and like Mike Kelly, the distractions will supercede the results on the field. I think the fans are already at revolt stage, how long before the players are there too? 3-15 (and that might even be charitable, but give them one win at home against Winnipeg - either the first game at the stadium opener where the fans will be jacked up or Labour Day which is always bizarro world for Winnipeg regardless of our record going in, one against Toronto, and one late in the year when the other random team is in the playoffs and doesn't care).
Hamilton - Weaker than the Grey Cup caliber team of 3-4 years ago, but still the best of a soft division, and if Caollaros can shake off his injury demons, he and Austin should lead the Ticats to a comfortable 1st place division finish. Just curious, without looking can anyone actually name the back-up QB in Steeltown if (when?) Zach goes down? (looked it up - I guess Masoli is still there, with Logan Kilgore as #3). 11-7. (9 of those wins against the East)
Ottawa - I really like Trevor Harris at QB, and thought the team might have actually been better with him at QB if you took Henry Burris' shoulder chip out of the equation, but his offence around him has been dismantled a bit. And lest we forget they were a losing team last year going in to the playoffs who needed a blizzard to beat the Esks and stupid play-calling by Dave Dickenson (down by 3, 2nd and goal from the 1 with one minute left and you take out Bo Levi to run a 3rd string QB option and don't hand off to Messam???? That's worse than Pete Carroll) to win the Grey Cup. Regression. 8-10.
Montreal - This team is more in need of a re-build than any other, and maybe firing Popp has already kick-started it more than I am prepared to give them credit for. Plus, Darian Durant is pissed off and REALLY wants to stick it to the 'Riders for cutting him loose, so that's good for 2 wins right there. But likely not much else goes well this year in the end I fear. Wouldn't surprise me if they did a tank job by season's end and were last, but early on I think they sneak out a few surprise wins before other teams catch on and take then seriously. 7-11 (if Durant gets hurt, take 3-4 wins off that total).
Toronto - Love the coaching and GM hire, but this will take time, and time is the one luxury they don't have in a market that has them ranked behind (in order) the Leafs, Jays, Raptors, NFL in general, the Bills in particular, Toronto FC, and quite possibly the Rock lacrosse team, not to mention any other cultural event like rock concerts. And Ricky Ray's first season magic is not there, even if he stays healthy. Let the annual gnashing of teeth begin about how the CFL will die without its flagship franchise being able to draw fans. 6-12.
Division semi-finals:
Winnipeg beats Ottawa in the crossover
Calgary takes out Edmonton in a coin flip game
Division finals:
BC wins at home, whichever Alberta team they face, in what is the true Grey Cup calibre match.
Bombers are an even money shot to become the first crossover team to go to the Grey Cup, but I don't want  to sound like a homer.
Leos win the cup over Wpg. or Hamilton.
MOP - Jennings (BC)
MOCanadian - Harris (Wpg)
MOLineman - Bond (Wpg) or Lavertu (Cal)
MODefensive - Eliminian (BC)
MORookie - couldn't tell you right now
MOSpecialTeams - Rainey or Williams (BC)
Wally wins coach of the year.

Someone had to start this one. And I suck at posting gifs, so I hope this works.
2017 Blue Bomber home season is upon us!

IGF repairs are done and the rum hut is open for business.

And one can only assume that do or die has re-stocked his gin supply for odds and sods this year

Someone had to start this one. And I suck at posting gifs, so I hope this works.
2017 Blue Bomber home season is upon us!

IGF repairs are done and the rum hut is open for business.

And one can only assume that do or die has re-stocked his gin supply for odds and sods this year

Someone had to start this one. And I suck at posting gifs, so I hope this works.
2017 Blue Bomber home season is upon us!

IGF repairs are done and the rum hut is open for business.

And one can only assume that do or die has re-stocked his gin supply for odds and sods this year

Because they have to play twice during the "special week" in week 5 where the league plays 5 games to accommodate an 81 game schedule. They have to play on the road Friday (in the West no less), then the following Wednesday at home, then the following Monday on the road, before their first bye. I'd rather have 2 byes (even if one is in week 1 or 20) than have 3 games in 3 cities in 11 days. They even get screwed by having week 20 as one of their 3 byes.

You mean like you did for the ourbombers.com site? 

Wow, 3rd and inches and they call Hamilton on illegal procedure because the centre tips the ball up before the snap. That is the most mickey mouse call I have ever seen in 35+ years of attaching football.
 

No long diatribe on the happy honker today, but would nominate Burnett for that hit that forced the fumble that Bass ran in. Runner-up could be Smith for that great simultaneous catch. But since this is a loss, almost feel like I should name an anti-Happy Honker (Terrible Tooter??, Brutal Blower??? Hapless Honker???), and no doubt it goes to Johnny Adams for his "oh-lay" arm wave on that fumble. Jump on the ball, don't play patty cake with it! Cost us 3 (very valuable, as it turned out) points.
And for all those who say too many FGs and not enough TDs, Calgary won because of their 5 FGs today.

Wow, 3rd and inches and they call Hamilton on illegal procedure because the centre tips the ball up before the snap. That is the most mickey mouse call I have ever seen in 35+ years of attaching football.
 

while antiquing.

Why do I see this popping up in a future thread about "you're not a true fan if....."
 
New benchmark for true fandom set. Better get on it, 17 and Noeller. Perhaps a day trip to Kansas to expedite the process. Or are you not true fans???????

And this is exactly why I say a loss here is not so vital. I get that beating Calgary now will give the Bombers the belief that "we CAN beat these guys" (Calgary's players in 2001 pointed to the final regular season game in Winnipeg where they won to sneak into the playoffs as the springboard game that gave them confidence that they could compete with the big dogs), but let's face it, the 2001 Bombers lost that Grey Cup because they spent the week "sizing rings for their fingers" as many players on both sides of the ball later admitted - we lost that game due to overconfidence. So let Calgary have all the cockiness in the world. I doubt a win by us this weekend will put much fear into them, since they have already beaten us twice by 2 touchdowns each game, and the scores were not even truly reflective of how dominant they were both times.
Ah, I hear you saying "But this is a different team. They haven't faced us with Matt Nicholls at quarterback!" Just stop for a second, metaphorically remove yourself from the Province of Manitoba for the moment, and re-read that second sentence out loud. Full respect to Nicholls and the job he has done managing the team through this 7 game run, but does that phrase really strike fear into the hearts of the inhabitants of Cowtown, or anyone else outside the 204? As an analogy, Carson Palmer may be a very good QB who can rattle off 7 straight wins with the Arizona Cardinals, but Tom Brady is not going to be intimidated because Palmer is now playing in place of Kurt Warner.
There are ways to beat this Calgary team for sure, but if both teams are playing their best football at the same time on game day and make minimal mistakes, then Calgary is handsomely favoured in that scenario, and should be. I like our odds better flying under the radar, walking in there in November (which, as I said before, is a fairly solid lock for where the West Final is going to be played this year, even if we win this weekend, given that they get all East teams in the final 5 weeks, including 2 against Montreal), catching them on 3 weeks rest and with having played no meaningful football for the better part of a month and a half (I'm calling it now, Stampeders will have enough points to clinch first in the West by week 16), with bad weather possibly playing a part in shutting down their high-octane offense (Calgary in late November, odds are decent that is the case), and maybe they are fat, sassy and dozing while we are battle-tested, riding momentum, and scrappy after fighting BC for 2nd place down the stretch, with a playoff win under our belts in the West semi. That scenario has not been infrequent for Calgary teams in the past.
Not trying to bash the Bombers, cheering madly for a win, especially to solidify a run at second place and a home playoff date, and to keep the (pipe?)dream of first in the West alive, but cheer with the heart and bet with the head is the winning formula, and I'm not pushing all my chips in with the Blue and Gold this weekend, that bet is best saved when we are the final 2 at the table.

And this is exactly why I say a loss here is not so vital. I get that beating Calgary now will give the Bombers the belief that "we CAN beat these guys" (Calgary's players in 2001 pointed to the final regular season game in Winnipeg where they won to sneak into the playoffs as the springboard game that gave them confidence that they could compete with the big dogs), but let's face it, the 2001 Bombers lost that Grey Cup because they spent the week "sizing rings for their fingers" as many players on both sides of the ball later admitted - we lost that game due to overconfidence. So let Calgary have all the cockiness in the world. I doubt a win by us this weekend will put much fear into them, since they have already beaten us twice by 2 touchdowns each game, and the scores were not even truly reflective of how dominant they were both times.
Ah, I hear you saying "But this is a different team. They haven't faced us with Matt Nicholls at quarterback!" Just stop for a second, metaphorically remove yourself from the Province of Manitoba for the moment, and re-read that second sentence out loud. Full respect to Nicholls and the job he has done managing the team through this 7 game run, but does that phrase really strike fear into the hearts of the inhabitants of Cowtown, or anyone else outside the 204? As an analogy, Carson Palmer may be a very good QB who can rattle off 7 straight wins with the Arizona Cardinals, but Tom Brady is not going to be intimidated because Palmer is now playing in place of Kurt Warner.
There are ways to beat this Calgary team for sure, but if both teams are playing their best football at the same time on game day and make minimal mistakes, then Calgary is handsomely favoured in that scenario, and should be. I like our odds better flying under the radar, walking in there in November (which, as I said before, is a fairly solid lock for where the West Final is going to be played this year, even if we win this weekend, given that they get all East teams in the final 5 weeks, including 2 against Montreal), catching them on 3 weeks rest and with having played no meaningful football for the better part of a month and a half (I'm calling it now, Stampeders will have enough points to clinch first in the West by week 16), with bad weather possibly playing a part in shutting down their high-octane offense (Calgary in late November, odds are decent that is the case), and maybe they are fat, sassy and dozing while we are battle-tested, riding momentum, and scrappy after fighting BC for 2nd place down the stretch, with a playoff win under our belts in the West semi. That scenario has not been infrequent for Calgary teams in the past.
Not trying to bash the Bombers, cheering madly for a win, especially to solidify a run at second place and a home playoff date, and to keep the (pipe?)dream of first in the West alive, but cheer with the heart and bet with the head is the winning formula, and I'm not pushing all my chips in with the Blue and Gold this weekend, that bet is best saved when we are the final 2 at the table.