Well, it's now been settled, and we officially get to host the WSF at home.  Thankfully us getting the Friday game gives us one extra day to rest and then prepare for one of the CFL's two villains.  So who do we want?

 

Me personally .... I'm probably going to go with the Ridirts.  It's not just about knocking off your rival, it's about getting the good matchup here.  I just really believe the Ridirts are a bad team with a good record.  They got there purely on luck.  Edmonton on the other hand ... Well they won 7 in a row, got injured and lost 6, but as they've started getting healthy, confidence is certainly getting back up.

 

My hope ... SSK wins but that both teams beat each other up bad enough that they both go limping into the playoffs.

12 hours ago, J5V said:

Nope. Not all. Blue Koolaid is potent. Look at that junkie theaardvark.

He's not as bad as pjrocksmb, that drunk clown is as blind as a bat to Richie Hall's awfulness.  Either that or he's related to him.

If hiring a coach who has won a Grey Cup in Winnipeg is some people's sole criterion... good luck getting Mike Riley out of Nebraska

2 minutes ago, bluto said:

If hiring a coach who has won a Grey Cup in Winnipeg is some people's sole criterion... good luck getting Mike Riley out of Nebraska

I don't think that was exactly the point.  Think the point is Richie Hall isn't some great DC that people think he is.

2 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

I don't think that was exactly the point.  Think the point is Richie Hall isn't some great DC that people think he is.

you have zero reading comprehension skills if you think anyone here believes Richie Hall is a great DC.   Nobody has ever made that claim.   People have said hes serviceable,  we can win with him if the team plays like it can, etc etc.   If we win the GC, I have no issue with him remaining until the wheels fall completely off.  I don't mind a defense that bends and doesn't break.   I like the turnovers and pressure.   Hall's an enigma to me.   He has the defense playing lights out some games, others they look like pee-wee ballers..

 

consistency needs to be better and then I'd consider calling him good to better lol.

3 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

you have zero reading comprehension skills if you think anyone here believes Richie Hall is a great DC.   Nobody has ever made that claim.   People have said hes serviceable,  we can win with him if the team plays like it can, etc etc.   If we win the GC, I have no issue with him remaining until the wheels fall completely off.  I don't mind a defense that bends and doesn't break.   I like the turnovers and pressure.   Hall's an enigma to me.   He has the defense playing lights out some games, others they look like pee-wee ballers..

 

consistency needs to be better and then I'd consider calling him good to better lol.

1. Atomic may not have directly made that claim, but his reference to the 2 grey cups Hall happened to benefit from with Austin and Chamblin winning them implies it

2. Hence why he's the equivalent of Marcel Bellefeuille coaching defense

Edited November 9, 20178 yr by USABomberfan

4 minutes ago, USABomberfan said:

1. Atomic may not have directly made that claim, but his reference to the 2 grey cups Hall happened to benefit from with Austin and Chamblin winning them implies it

2. Hence why he's the equivalent of Marcel Bellefeuille coaching defense

That's a trumpian  level of leap to connect things imo lol

58 minutes ago, bluto said:

If hiring a coach who has won a Grey Cup in Winnipeg is some people's sole criterion... good luck getting Mike Riley out of Nebraska

The way things are going in Nebraska, he'll be available in about two months (or less).

Just now, nate007 said:

The way things are going in Nebraska, he'll be available in about two months (or less).

I'm betting once his tenure is up there he's going to retire from football for good.

My ears are burning!

3 hours ago, SPuDS said:

you have zero reading comprehension skills if you think anyone here believes Richie Hall is a great DC.   Nobody has ever made that claim.   People have said hes serviceable,  we can win with him if the team plays like it can, etc etc.   If we win the GC, I have no issue with him remaining until the wheels fall completely off.  I don't mind a defense that bends and doesn't break.   I like the turnovers and pressure.   Hall's an enigma to me.   He has the defense playing lights out some games, others they look like pee-wee ballers..

 

consistency needs to be better and then I'd consider calling him good to better lol.

Maybe it's the circles I run in but as long as I have been around football as a fan and as a coach, I don't think I have ever actually heard a defensive coordinator describe his defense this way. I've never heard  a defensive guy say we are going to give up tons of yardage but will hold them when it matters. Most defensive coordinators I know and hear from scheme their defense to their existing talent base to maximize two and outs and  to force turnovers. If there is a creature like this that describes his defense as a bend don't break, I'd get that out from them in the interview hiring process and would not let him anywhere near my team. 

Jim Daley and the "lets try to contain them" defense.   I still have nightmares.

21 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Maybe it's the circles I run in but as long as I have been around football as a fan and as a coach, I don't think I have ever actually heard a defensive coordinator describe his defense this way. I've never heard  a defensive guy say we are going to give up tons of yardage but will hold them when it matters. Most defensive coordinators I know and hear from scheme their defense to their existing talent base to maximize two and outs and  to force turnovers. If there is a creature like this that describes his defense as a bend don't break, I'd get that out from them in the interview hiring process and would not let him anywhere near my team. 

Both Hall, O'shea and even to an extent Edmtonton have mentioned they utilize a defense that employs this method.  Not sure who you've been talking to but its common enough to me.. hell, teams have been using variations of bend but don't break for years.

Hmmm, I seem to recall MOS said once he's not a huge fan of bend but don't break

2 hours ago, USABomberfan said:

Hmmm, I seem to recall MOS said once he's not a huge fan of bend but don't break

dood. do you even read the posts?  I never said he liked them, only that they use the style of defense.

17 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

dood. do you even read the posts?  I never said he liked them, only that they use the style of defense.

No need to get worked up ... DOOD!!

Both O'Shea and Hall deny that their D scheme is "bend but don't break" and they've denied it several times over the past two years.  Sheesh.

5 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Both O'Shea and Hall deny that their D scheme is "bend but don't break" and they've denied it several times over the past two years.  Sheesh.

Thats the kind of thing that makes me trust whatever mike oshea says in the media

16 hours ago, USABomberfan said:

Hmmm, I seem to recall MOS said once he's not a huge fan of bend but don't break

Interesting. The best D he ever played in was usually referred to as BBDB...

Have we forgotten about the legendary Stubler bend but don’t break D already?

I maintain that part of the reason the Bombers generate as many turnovers as they do is because opponents get impatient and don't take the dink and dunk stuff that is there. 

I believe that Richie Hall has described his defense as "a systematic withdrawal until such time as a demarcation line is crossed, at which point resistance is fortified".  This is NOT  "bend but don't break".

5 hours ago, Blueandgold said:

Have we forgotten about the legendary Stubler bend but don’t break D already?

I think people are confusing bend but don't break with break your offense down defense.  Stubler's philosophy always has and always is make em earn every yard and shut em down.