2-0 is the goal, Jake and that Dline should feast, 15th straight sellout, rain or not.........LETS ******* GO!!!!!!!

2 hours ago, Atomic said:

There's no chance they are making a move on O'Shea or Walters right after they extended both. They're 1-1 right now. Lots of season left.

100%. With the coaching cap, we are married to this set up for another 2 years.

ya, even if the wheels completely fall off this year. Outside of a 1-17 record...both are staying until likely well into year 3. I'd be surprised if it was any sooner

3 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

ya, even if the wheels completely fall off this year. Outside of a 1-17 record...both are staying until likely well into year 3. I'd be surprised if it was any sooner

Well as long as that results in 3 cups i’m all good with this. :)

4 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

ya, even if the wheels completely fall off this year. Outside of a 1-17 record...both are staying until likely well into year 3. I'd be surprised if it was any sooner

Even if we are a 4-5 win team this year and next, unless we found a good coach working for free, we wouldn't be able to replace em.

Assuming the cap stays as is, the future is likely to continue with established HC/GMs with an ast GM. Or an established GM with a low-buck young coaching staff.

7 hours ago, Mike said:

I do actually agree that if one goes, the other should go too. Despite how disjointed it looks in it's execution, the line we've been fed for years is that it's one unit working in unison and every decision they make is made as a team. I don't think Walters deserves to keep his job if O'Shea is let go, if for nothing else than because he's spent too much time allowing what could be his subordinate to have an equal say when it hasn't been or shouldn't be needed.

Agreed that the biggest argument for firing Walters may well be that he has not corrected O'Shea or hung onto him for too long. The concerns about our HC have been evident for some three years and Walters ought to have acted sooner.

9 hours ago, voodoochylde said:

19 hours ago, Stickem said:

I'd give it a little time before we put together a lynching party....We have an idea but not quite sure where to put blame, even if everything starts to go off the rails...Got to say that piss poor defensive effort doesn't cast a great light on Younger BUT does he take ALL of the blame...I think we have to start changing players before coaches cuz maybe we just don't have the right mix on D...We'll see who shows up next home game, and IF we get more of the same, there has to be changes....I don't know where the term FIFO went when referring to the attitude this club had ....but they better get it back and the term should apply to coaches as well

I think we are all over reacting to a poor defensive game very early in the season with a boat load of players adjusting to new positions and new players in general. It takes time to gel given this amount of change on defence. It will tighten up. Our O and STs are doing very well early, I am more worried about them keeping up their torrid pace. At any rate, we have seen some very positive changes thus far. Just need to tighten things up.

18 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Even if we are a 4-5 win team this year and next, unless we found a good coach working for free, we wouldn't be able to replace em.

Assuming the cap stays as is, the future is likely to continue with established HC/GMs with an ast GM. Or an established GM with a low-buck young coaching staff.

You do get some exemption on a coaching fire. That being said the time we could have done it has passed. These are our guys for better or for worse, the echo chamber about MOS and Walters has a lot of tread left before we hear the end of it.

13 hours ago, Tracker said:

Agreed that the biggest argument for firing Walters may well be that he has not corrected O'Shea or hung onto him for too long. The concerns about our HC have been evident for some three years and Walters ought to have acted sooner.

Is there any proof that he has acted at all, or even wants to do so?

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by GCn20

21 hours ago, Mike said:

I'd toss them both out just for the stand alone reason of this bullshit with the refusal to use an American as a Canadian even though we're allowed to. It's borderline negligent and I know that's not going to sit well with some people but there's a reason we are the only one of nine teams that doesn't use it.

If I'm being honest in 2026 the only reason Bryant should still be on a pro football field is to count for the ratio. If we want that to be an American spot we damn sure should be playing someone a lot better.

6 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

If I'm being honest in 2026 the only reason Bryant should still be on a pro football field is to count for the ratio. If we want that to be an American spot we damn sure should be playing someone a lot better.

Didn't you hear that LT now stands for Legacy Tackle?

51 minutes ago, Mike said:

Didn't you hear that LT now stands for Legacy Tackle?

Lifetime tackle, Bryant gets the spot for as long as he wants lol.

Bryant should've been at best RT in camp, and should've been well behind Randolph. Who starts for the Argos now. How many of the OL here would start on another team if cut, 2, maaaaybe 3 out of 9?