brett_c_b

When he got hurt I asked a friends wife about the type of injury he suffered. She figured 3 months. If that's accurate, then we likely don't see him again this season unless we're hanging on to a playoff spot really late in the year.

I would replace one coach every three games on a rotating basis, as that's usually how long it takes the internet to call for someones head.

Someone at work asked me today if I was going, and was quite suprised when I said no. She knows I'm going to CFL games this year in calgary/edmonton/vancouver/ottawa/toronto, so just expected I'd make a trip to Winnipeg for the Grey Cup. There are two main reasons I'm not going. 1. I went to the last Grey Cup in Winnipeg and it was the worst pro sports experience I've had. Our whole section just wanted to drink, and I spent more time getting up and down to let people out of the aisle than I did watching the game. I barely saw any of the game because of the drunks who had no interest in football. 2. Price, I tend to avoid overpriced sporting events (I considered going to the World Juniors in Finland this year since I figure I can go to Finland to watch for the same price as watching the tournament in Toronto/Montreal since I wouldn't be paying the ridiculous ticket prices).

Randle's "linebacker" spot is essentially a 3rd HB mirroring the fact that on the majority of downs offenses play 3 SB's and 2 WR's. Simmons and Bass don't really fit the profile of guys you want covering SB's all the time. appreciate the information. Growing up somewhere where playing football was never an option my only knowledge is what I've seen watching the game and reading on here, so I appreciate the game, but don't have the position by position knowledge of other sports I've played or coached where I understand what every player should be doing.

So I'll admit I don't know the ins and outs of each linebacker spot, I see a lot of talk of maybe rotating him with the existing linebackers. For those with more knowledge than myself, what option makes more sense, either rotating him with the existing linebackers, or making him a starting linebacker, filling those three spots with bass/hurl/simmons, then put randle on the corner instead of bucknor. Leaves you starting 7 Canadians with Adams/Randle on the corners. In theory you'd still be fine in case of an injury as if someone in the secondary goes down you can play bucknor and if a linebacker goes down Randle can always shift back to linebacker with Bucknor coming in to play corner. All the talk lately of teams picking on Bucknor just wondering if signing Simmons opens up the possibility of putting randle back on the corner

This can't be right. The rest of the league has more than 1 defensive TD for sure, the Bombers have one, I believe Edmonton and Montreal have a few. Toronto scored a special teams one on us this week. Just pulled up the league stats for after week 7 on cflmedia.ca and it shows the following interception/fumble recovery TD's Hamilton - 5, Davis - 3, Sears - 1, Stewart - 1 Winnipeg - 2, Adams - 1, Sherman - 1 Edmonton - 2 Ojo - 1, Watkins - 1 Calgary - 2 Raymond - 1, Thibault - 1 Toronto - 1, Jefferson Ottawa - 1, Evans And for punt return Td's Hamilton - 2, Banks Montreal - 1, Logan

Why is there even a thread about a team having fun winning games. At the end of the day everyone who has played a sport started playing it because it's fun. Nobody here would be complaining about the bombers enjoying themselves or being dirty if the roles were reversed. Half his board was thrilled to sign Picard because they want our O-line to be dirtier/nastier and have an attitude. These guys aren't making millions, who cares if they're enjoying their job. If the bombers ever get to a point of winning more games than they lose, I hope they enjoy it too.

Also pay attention to how ineffective Montreal has been on 2nd down (0/12 I think to start the game before their first conversion). I plan to remember that if the Bombers struggle tomorrow.

message for bomber fans after a tough loss https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKLmXPQFscs

going through my picks, I've picked every single montreal game wrong so far

I don't go to the concession during games as I don't have the patience for the lines and don't want to miss any of the game otherwise. So I basically get to my seat and don't leave until the game is over, so the concourse really only impacts me before/after the game.

It's old and showing it's age, but it's still a good place to watch football. Not really any poor seats to watch from, yeah there;s bench seats in the endzone sections and maybe up in the nose bleeds, but so what? Not like putting a board on the back makes things any more comfortable. the one time I sat on the benches at Mcmahon I was just glad the attendance was so sparse, for where the seats are outlined I don't know how you actually fit 1 person per spot. That said I'm above average in both height and weight so seating room is always something I'm looking at. The benches at Mcmahon were awful from what I recall, the actual seats are fine. The times I've been to IGF the legroom in some areas was fantastic, and seemed to be above average anywhere I sat. MTS Centre however I don't like going to on the other hand. I went to a world junior pre-tournament game there a decade ago, the leg room was bad enough I've turned down free NHL tickets because I just don't want to sit in there again.

Is she hot? I agree we need pics here. She was very HOT! In addition, usually drunk by half time. The perfect combo. Skinny and drunk with big ****, that kind of perfect combo. BUT Nooooooooo, I had some morals. I had some ethics. I was a complete idiot. Now I'm just stuck reminding myself of her from time to time when, well you know. ?

I don't think I've ever seen the Bombers win a game in person. The years I lived in Winnipeg I was a student and didn't make it to many games, and 6 years in Alberta hasn't been kind. So some fans have never seen the Bombers win a Grey Cup, I've never actually seen them win a game.

In the moment I liked the call from Tedford to try make O'shea pay for putting them in 2nd and 18 instead of 3rd and 8 and punting. They never should have been in 3rd and 2 to go for it if O'shea made a better call the play before. The upside to accepting that penalty is up to 10 yard of field position, the downside is potentially a first down. Didn't seem like a smart move from Winnipeg at the time. Wasn't 3rd and 8. It was 3rd and less than 2 yards. The penalty was applied from the previous spot. *edit* appears I remembered it incorrectly, ignore me

In the moment I liked the call from Tedford to try make O'shea pay for putting them in 2nd and 18 instead of 3rd and 8 and punting. They never should have been in 3rd and 2 to go for it if O'shea made a better call the play before. The upside to accepting that penalty is up to 10 yard of field position, the downside is potentially a first down. Didn't seem like a smart move from Winnipeg at the time.

that's not fair. Cato was 4th string. Please compare him to our 4th string for a fair assessment

yeah what the hell was that about? All the Stamps had to do was down the ball and run out the clock, and instead they do this weird back pass thing - what would have happened if Fuller had missed the ball and it had bounced around in the end zone? Montreal could have jumped on it and scored a TD. I don't get it. hufnagel picked montreal to cover the spread on his sport select ticket so he needed to concede the safety to win

Bede isn't a Canadian citizen - he's from France. Still, considered a Natl. no? I believe the old rules more or less let anyone from another country who didn't play football in the US be a non-import (ie an Aussie rugby player looked at as a punter would have been a NI on the old rules) New rules state " Nationals are defined as a person who was a Canadian citizen when he signed his first contract, classified as a non-import before May 31, 2014, or has lived in Canada for five years before turning 18" So under the old rules I believe bede would have been a NI, with the new rules he's an international Really strange, because Bede played college at Laval. Yet both Waggoner and Westerman qualify as Natls. through loopholes. wouldn't call it a loophole, it's just the new rules. Waggoner has Canadian citizenship, so he's a National. Bede doesn't so he's an international. Although I get what you're saying in regards to Waggoner played all his football in the US and Bede played university in Canada.

Bede isn't a Canadian citizen - he's from France. Still, considered a Natl. no? I believe the old rules more or less let anyone from another country who didn't play football in the US be a non-import (ie an Aussie rugby player looked at as a punter would have been a NI on the old rules) New rules state " Nationals are defined as a person who was a Canadian citizen when he signed his first contract, classified as a non-import before May 31, 2014, or has lived in Canada for five years before turning 18" So under the old rules I believe bede would have been a NI, with the new rules he's an international

still early, but so far glad I took Montreal in the pickems

This weeks pick ems are great. 3 games are basically 17 people vs 16 people, so basically 50/50. Then the other game is 32 for Edmonton and Duressler47(I assume) as the only person picking Sask

I could be wrong on this as I'm far from a football genius, but from what I've seen if we're up against a stronger D line where we aren't opening up as many holes I'd prefer to see the run game focus on Marshall and pounding for yardage. Against a weaker D line or a game where our O line is opening up some holes I'd prefer to see it tend more towards Cotton who is more likely to make a linebacker or DB miss one or one after getting through the line. Basically call the plays based on what we're being given on the field and making adjustments to it, which isn't really a very Blue Bombers thing to do.

Typo, he meant Brink not brick. He got far too excited thinking about Brink and Elliott coming back he missed a few words that would have provided the necessary clarity on our future Brink/Elliott QB combo

I know the intent of this wasn't necessarily to say Marve isn't suited to start games, but I think it's a bit early to say to split the back up role up when Marve has never had any opportunity to start a game or be the true backup But then again I'm in the play Marve camp more because I don't want to see Brohm on the field in any situation. I can't see how he could be worse than Brohm, so even if we know Willy is out and have a full week of prep, I'd rather see them go with Marve and see how it plays out.