Jump to content

The underrated career of Charles Roberts


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Rich said:

Would people be for or against Roberts going up on the Bombers Ring of Honour?

100% for. They shouldve done it when they honored him a couple years ago. Didnt he have trouble getting across the border to do that? Might be hard to accomplish now idk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Stickem said:

After watching that film bit....I really think he might have been the best back we ever had....No taking anything away from our present guy Andrew...but pound for pound he has to be ranked close to the best this league has ever seen.....How soon we forget ....but watching Charlie cut it up field and making the opposition look silly, just brought back all of those thrilling moments he gave us

Harris is one of the best of all time. Both are top 5 guys. But for me, blink is no2 behind pringle. And its kind of an emitt vs sweetness thing. Pringle had the much longer career, but blink stack up blinks seasons with pringles best and blink was better in every single one. 

And he did it, with far less than harris or pringle too. Watch those clips of him and look at the names of his OL. Those were some crazy lean years for our OL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people mistook my comments in this thread as being anti-ChuckDiesel1 (...if anyone remembers those days.....) but that's inaccurate. I'm thankful for the entertainment he brought us from his work on the field. I just think we'd have at least 1 more Cup, if not 2, if he'd put in ANY work whatsoever. 

Having said that, he 100% deserves to be in the ring of honour, whenever the club deems it's his time. He's one of the most talented RBs to ever play the 3 Down Game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Yeah 100% deserves to be recognized. He gave a lot for this team. It is just a shame that the way it ended was such a sour note. 

This. His departure via trade during the 2008 season was so unceremonious and disappointing (regardless of the reasons), IMO. He was such a joy to watch during his time with this team.

Still chaps my ass the 2001 juggernaut couldn't get the job done but I'd argue several players on that team got fat and sassy at the wrong time and were punched in the mouth in that GC game by an underdog. I don't think Charles alone is to blame for that one, much in the same way he's not solely to blame for the 2007 GC loss.

Edited by blue_gold_84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, blue_gold_84 said:

This. His departure via trade during the 2008 season was so unceremonious and disappointing (regardless of the reasons), IMO. He was such a joy to watch during his time with this team.

Still chaps my ass the 2001 juggernaut couldn't get the job done but I'd argue several players on that team got fat and sassy at the wrong time and were punched in the mouth in that GC game by an underdog. I don't think Charles alone is to blame for that one, much in the same way he's not to blame for the 2007 GC loss.

Oh he gets a lot of blame for 07 from me. Was brutal in a game that he was needed in. 

and let's not forget that in 01 he quit on the team for a while when he felt he wasn't getting enough touches. 

Hell of a talent and overall a positive for the team but he had a lack of professionalism that probably did cost this team some potential championships. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 17to85 said:

Oh he gets a lot of blame for 07 from me. Was brutal in a game that he was needed in. 

and let's not forget that in 01 he quit on the team for a while when he felt he wasn't getting enough touches. 

Hell of a talent and overall a positive for the team but he had a lack of professionalism that probably did cost this team some potential championships. 

Yeah, I should've clarified better. He gets his share of fault in either case but I wouldn't put it all entirely at his feet, the 2001 team in particular. They were by and large full of themselves and didn't seem to take things seriously going into that championship game. The fumble in the 2007 East Final was just brutal to watch but that seemed like a botched play from the snap.

Blink had immense talent but his work ethic and attitude didn't always seem up to par. And then whatever off field issues he had only exacerbated things. As far as championships go, however, I'm of the opinion it's win as a team, lose as a team with 2001 and 2007 not being exceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

The fumble in the 2007 East Final was just brutal to watch but that seemed like a botched play from the snap.

I am not even referring to that, that's just a **** happens kind of bad luck play. I am referring to the fact that Roberts played like complete dog **** in the 07 grey cup game. Now memories are fuzzy and I ain't going to back to watch that **** but I seem to recall them trying to get the ball into his hands early with some passes and he proceeded to drop them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is a standard for what players name can or cannot be hoisted on a ring of honour perhaps as guidance we can review rules in other leagues. Major League Basball has had more than its fair share of of banning for discrediting the league. Famously Pete Rose (now in his 80’s) a true performer, Shoeless Joe, a standout in his era are a couple of the most famous banned. However I didn’t know until researching that Mickey Mantle and Will Mays were also banned! Mantle and Mays were retired but were banned, punished, for being greeters at a casino. Eventually their bans were lifted. 
Many of the banned players on the MLB were involved in some manner in gambling. One chap was even banned for selling stolen cars. 
Chuckie was never suspended for any of his on or off field antics. Suspensions don’t appear to count against players as by its nature are just a defined punishment, and life goes on. 
Chuck, never suspended and not banned, should be up there on The Ring of Honour. 

Edited by Rod Black
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rod Black said:

If there is a standard for what players name can or cannot be hoisted on a ring of honour perhaps as guidance we can review rules in other leagues. Major League Basball has had more than its fair share of of banning for discrediting the league. Famously Pete Rose (now in his 80’s) a true performer, Shoeless Joe, a standout in his era are a couple of the most famous banned. However I didn’t know until researching that Mickey Mantle and Will Mays were also banned! Mantle and Mays were retired but were banned, punished, for being greeters at a casino. Eventually their bans were lifted. 
Many of the banned players on the MLB were involved in some manner in gambling. One chap was even banned for selling stolen cars. 
Chuckie was never suspended for any of his on or off field antics. Suspensions don’t appear to count against players as by its nature are just a defined punishment, and life goes on. 
Chuck, never suspended and not banned, should be up there on The Ring of Honour. 

A club’s decision to honour a player is usually separate to a league decision to ban them though. Mantle and Mays both had their numbers retired and were already in the baseball Hall of Fame before they got banned. Pete Rose was banned for life but the Reds still retired his number in 2016. And Roberts is in the Canadian Football Hall of Fame. There is no formal disciplinary issue that would keep him from being honoured, and he should be up there for sure. 
 

As for when, he could go in any time now. But if he slotted anywhere from first to last on the list with Joe Poplawski, James Murphy, Greg Battle, Ty Jones, and Rod Hill it would not surprise me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

A club’s decision to honour a player is usually separate to a league decision to ban them though. Mantle and Mays both had their numbers retired and were already in the baseball Hall of Fame before they got banned. Pete Rose was banned for life but the Reds still retired his number in 2016. And Roberts is in the Canadian Football Hall of Fame. There is no formal disciplinary issue that would keep him from being honoured, and he should be up there for sure. 
 

As for when, he could go in any time now. But if he slotted anywhere from first to last on the list with Joe Poplawski, James Murphy, Greg Battle, Ty Jones, and Rod Hill it would not surprise me. 

I’d agree the decision to ban or honour Chuck is the the clubs. No reason to ban the guy and there is no disciplinary issue. That being the fact, I hope his name is up on the ring.
 

Maybe when his statue is placed it will be #1 crossing the goal with the ball, a can of beer in the other hand and a smoke hanging from his gob. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Oh he gets a lot of blame for 07 from me. Was brutal in a game that he was needed in. 

and let's not forget that in 01 he quit on the team for a while when he felt he wasn't getting enough touches. 

Hell of a talent and overall a positive for the team but he had a lack of professionalism that probably did cost this team some potential championships. 

Lets also remember that We were running troy mills and eric blount twice as much as we ran blink, while mills and blount struggled to get 4 yards per touch and blink was getting almost 7 per touch. He also played 17 games in 2001. Blink would lead a drive down to the deep red zone then he'd get pulled out for blount and mills to finish the drive. 

 A lot more players today would quit if they had to put up with that, and not "quit" by playing all but 1 game. (iirc he was on the PR for week 1) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...