mbrg

What needs to be removed is using the helmet as a weapon. It is meant to be there to protect.

He is currently on the roster page. I'm not sure there is a reason for their to be "word" on him. There are other guys who finished the season on the PR who do not appear on the roster, and he's not mentioned when potential FA's are listed. My recollection was his stock dropped during his draft year because he had spent most of that season injured. He went back and played his final season at Western(?) and came back to the Bombers when the PR expanded in October. He could be decent. No one paid any attention to him because he didn't weigh 500 pounds and have BUTCHER as a last name.

Unless he's asking for a really big raise, I'd have to think fatboi Thomas is a FA the Bombers will try hard to re-sign. He has consistently exceeded my expectations. For a guy rotating in, he's always popping up on the stat sheet in some manner. Or is Marouf better than I think he is?

TEEMU! TEEMU! TEEMU! Sorry, but we just don't get many chances to chant that these days.

And neither of these guys will be kept because they are a short-yardage threat. There is no such thing as a short-yardage threat. To not acknowledge how good LeFevour is at it is to be deliberately obtuse. He makes it look easy, and it isn't easy. It's also not enough of a reason to keep him on the roster. Spell-check does not appreciate your old-timey spelling of plough, but I do.

4 out of 5 times that would likely be the case. And 1 out of 5 times, a fumble. It's similar, but it's not the same. Kind of like having Bond line up to lead block at fullback because he's heavier. It might work sometimes, but the flaws will eventually be exposed.

The Jets get too aggressive and put themselves out of position. As soon as there is a good chance they all hear "FINISH HIM" ala Street Fighter and get together for a team meeting in the other goalie's blue paint. And then it's just one good save or one bad bounce and the opposition is off on a 2 on 0 or 3 on 1 and usually end it. The Colorado game is the most restraint/discipline the Jets have shown this season during 3 on 3, as they waited till the last 15 seconds before serving up the "oops!". Considering they haven't been any better in the shootout, I don't fault them for trying to end it at that moment. If your team has the puck and it isn't on your stick, you should either be the guy circling in for a pass or circling out for support. Do this until the other team loses you for a moment and hope your aim is true. As an old-school stay at home Dman, I would have struggled mightily being expected to play that loosely.

Jean Van De Velde - great moments in short yardage.

I strongly disliked the decision the Bombers made with Davis after Nichols got injured. Davis came in and was mostly ineffective. 7 out of 12 for 82 yards. No TDs. No ints. He had a few good throws, a few bad throws, and a few terrible drops from his receivers (Dressler and Coates going purely off memory). He looked hesitant in his reads and didn't trust what he was seeing. I'd give his performance a D. Then LeFevour comes in and puts up a F--. Completely shits the bed. 5 out of 12 for 42 yards, no drops that I can recall, and two ugly interceptions. There were 3 different points in that game where he deserved to be taken out and have Davis put back in, but the douchey fans who chanted for LeFevour when Davis was in weren't ready to acknowledge they were morons and chant for Davis to get his job back. Okay, fine. That was a suspect in-game decision that didn't pay off. The young QB came off the bench cold and couldn't get any kind of rhythm going, so you went to the vet who has had success improvising and going off-script. It completely backfired. Now you have a full week to prepare for the next game. Instead of giving Davis first team reps in practise, the thing that could have helped him familiarize himself with the both the first team receivers and his reads, they doubled down on the bed-shitter. Why? I don't know. He **** the bed again, thankfully our defence brought a big enough mop and bucket to salvage a win. Maybe Davis does no better in Calgary than LeFevour. We'll never know. But that should have been his make or break opportunity, and it was a terrible decision to not give him that. Why even bother having him on the roster all season? Give him one lousy week of starter reps to work with and judge his performance based on that. Justin Goltz got a significantly better opportunity than Davis. I don't know if he'll be back this season, but Davis losing his backup job last season to LeFevour based on what both QB's did in the BC game makes about as much sense as Giselle Brady losing a swimsuit modeling cover to me because she has a pimple. As for LeFevour and QB sneaks, while a QB sneak "should be automatic", it isn't. LeFevour is the best at it I've ever seen. He wasn't close to being stopped last year, and on several occasions looked like he could break those into TD runs. Credit where credit is due, he is fantastic at those. If we had a NFL size gameday roster, tagging him as a RB and keeping him as a short yardage specialist might be justifiable. Probably not in the CFL though.

I'm sure Washington still considers Martin Erat for Filip Forsberg a win-win for both teams. 2013 Stanley Cup champs!

BEL A ROOOOOOS!!! BEL A ROOOOOOS!!! BEL A ROOOOOOS!!!

Not mentioned - that table may be located at Golden Corral...

I remember an interview with Arians from the latter half of Manning's time with the Colts. The reporter observed that Manning got 100% of the reps in practise. He asked Arians what happens if Manning gets injured. Arians said "Then we're ******". The reporter offered the suggestion they spend some practise time with the backup in. Arians reply: "Why would we practise being ******?"

When defensive coordinators are the ones saying it, then it might be true. I haven't heard any DC's saying that. Jennings is young and hasn't been in the CFL for very long. He's early on the learning curve. In 2 more years he might be reading defences better and making smarter decisions. Right now he's relying on his athletic gifts to compensate. That's what the athletically gifted QBs do. All of them. Once they move further up the curve, they do it less. He might learn. He might not. He might be given up on before he gets a chance. I wouldn't necessarily say DB's winning some of those 40 yard jump-ball passes as meaning "DC's have figured him out". They should win some of those jump balls. It was getting ridiculously frustrating watching them lose every last one of them, and having Rod Black squeal like a schoolgirl as a result. "CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT!!!??". Yes Rod, I can. It's football. Receivers will catch the ball in the air, and jump up to do it. I might have digressed.

He does himself one better. Way better. #AlsMTL coaching race: Two weeks ago - Claybrooks/Washington Last week - Bellefeullie/Condell Today - Gary Crowton/Kerry Joseph Next week - Bart Andrus/Mike Kelly January - @ArashMadani/@fakeGAINER February - Ghost of Vince Lombardi/Tackling Dummy with Googly Eyes That is gold.

Smart, fast, runs crisp routes. That slant thru the middle he runs 12 yards deep, not a lot of DBs can defend that.

Indeed. Vasquez for only $700,000 a season is an insane bargain. David Bechkam, Thierry Henry. MLS has been playing with big-boy money for a long time. Small scale big-boy money. Messi makes 10x what Altidore makes.

Quoted for truth! (also, great signing)

Based on the past two seasons, mathematically, it couldn't be less. But it would be a shame to end the tradition of Paul Friesen sauntering into practise with 5 minutes left, asking everyone what he missed, then submitting some hatchet piece about OShea disrespecting the fans by having an unkempt beard.

His contract at Oregon State had a clause where a year was added to the length every time he qualified for a bowl game, which wasn't that hard to do given the number of bowl games. By the end though, the Beavers' continual struggle to be a serious player in the PAC12 or defeat the rival Ducks when it mattered left a lot of OS supporters grumbling about Riley. They might not have any interest in taking him back even though they've gotten significantly worse without him. I had a chance to talk to him a few years ago and suggested he should convince Jacquizz Rodgers to come to the Bombers. Unfortunately he's totally enamoured with having a NFL contract. Pretty selfish of him.

Subsubplot: Can the Jets 2.0 break the cycle of violence and win their first game with mbrg in attendance, or will they drop yet another? Inquiring minds want to know.

That wasn't meant to sound as dickish as it did. The recipe for making a cake usually doesn't say "Add cake" Byfuglien turned the puck over and it led to a goal. The decisions and actions of his teammates had as much to do with that particular turnover as any decision and action Byfuglien made. There were more ingredients than that.

? That makes no sense at all. It is a FACT that Dallas Eakins is responsible for all Edmonton losses. the more you know...

Adrius Bowman makes an awful lot of money dropping footballs. If it's just about a nice pay raise, they can keep Franklin and still have a receiving corps that (ignoring any pending free agencies) features Zylstra, Walker, Hazelton, Williams, Mitchell, and Watson. They'd lose a guy who was an all-star last season and still have a better group of receivers than the Bombers. If Franklin needs a guarantee he is competing for a starting job, then Edmonton will become his former team.

I've already figured out you don't know what to tell me, but I was hopeful you'd at least take a crack at it. Explain the events of those shifts. I should look at the recap that starts after he's already exited the Jets zone? How does that show the play develop? If you are going to make claims like Byfuglien caused goals, which I maintain is total rubbish, then explain how. What is the mistake Byfuglien made on those plays? You even have the benefit of hindsight to do it. None of his teammates came back when he first picked up the puck in his own zone (not shown in that video) which is why he carries the puck up. None of his teammates presented themselves in passing lanes when he crossed his blue line (not really shown in that video). None of his teammates presented themselves in passing lanes when he crossed the red line. With the linesman, Wheeler and the Minnesota defenseman spread along the blue line he has no path for a dump in. Chairot moves up along the boards right beside Byfuglien rather than sliding underneath into the space vacated in the middle, and instead helps funnel Byfuglien into Minnesota's players. None of the Jets forwards change their angle of approach. Wheeler and Connor mostly have their backs to Byfuglien but Scheifele can see the trap Minnesota is playing and continues to turn offensively rather than defensively even though Wheeler and Connor were already approaching the blue line. Connor ends up being the first forward back when Scheifele was in a far better position to read the play. Would he have been able to influence the play? Maybe. That's really hard to say. If he can get to one of the forwards Hellebuyck has one less player to pay attention to and can just key in on the shooter. So, once again, what is the mistake? Where in all of that should Byfuglien done something differently, and what was it that he should have done? Should he have just iced the puck when he picked it up in front of Hellebuyck, because that way he can avoid internet blame? Which one of his teammates did anything to help him out on that play? By the time he reaches the red line all he has left is to try and bulldoze his way into the zone. Minnesota has taken away all other options and his teammates have presented no new ones. When the team does video review the next day, Maurice is going to point a finger at several players. On the second goal, Byfuglien caused this by...? Tripping Laine? Telling Kulikov to tie up his man but just not his arms, stick or the puck? What is the thing you think he should have done? Taken the guy in front? Which of course allows Cullen to walk in front of the net with the puck, which by your logic would also be Byfuglien causing a goal. Byfuglien has only two plays there. Intercept the player (Cullen) or intercept the pass. Intercepting the player has a good success rate if the defenceman reaches the post before the forward does. This play developed far too quickly for Byfuglien to have a chance at that. Intercepting the pass is the only play he was left with, and he didn't have time to drop his body or the stick. Success lowers when you have your back to the player in front of the net, as you have to guess at the passing angle and only have a split second to do it. He got caught in the middle, and it did look like he experienced some mental vapour-lock with the split second he had. His best bet would have been to try and take one step towards Cullen, which is all he would have had time to do, and try and force a bad pass. This might also have given Hellebuyck another split second to commit to Stewart and move over to that side fractionally sooner, which at best gives him a slim shot to make a save-of-the-year candidate (will someday be know as the Bobrovsky Award). That goal happened because Kulikov let his man get free enough to make a two-handed pass despite thinking he had him completely tied up, and because Laine fell. Byfuglien was the defenceman unfortunate enough to be on the ice while this happened, which means people with limited hockey knowledge get to blame him.