Kelly looks like he did pre injury

Sucks to see Randolph that first Argo drive locking down right side of their oline...why we cut him...who knows

**** all sex pests... But especially Chad Kelly. Go Als Go....

Chad Kelly is despicable, but watching him and Alexander chucking footballs effortlessly and accurately reminds me that Collaros is approaching the limit of his shelf life rapidly.

Edited Friday at 11:39 PM1 day by Tracker

23 minutes ago, Noeller said:

**** all sex pests... But especially Chad Kelly. Go Als Go....

I’d have to agree. Alexander strikes me as a bit of a knob, but I’ll still pull for him over a garbage human like Chad Kelly.

43 minutes ago, Tracker said:

Chad Kelly is despicable, but watching him and Alexander chucking footballs effortlessly and accurately reminds me that Collaros is approaching the limit of his shelf life rapidly.

He says not even 24 hours after Collaros turns back the clock and goes off for 421 yards. Makes sense to me.

I do enjoy listening to Neilson and Willson tho..Willson is good at color..ads a lot to broadcast.. Suitor ads nothing

I've heard this dude Sterns name before 😉

I can't help but think both of these offenses would rip us a new one.

18 minutes ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

I can't help but think both of these offenses would rip us a new one.

It seems to me that the whole game is being played better and at a much higher tempo than either of the two games the Bombers have played so far.

We get rid of Wheatfall & Stearns but we don't sign two players to replace them. That sure seems to be the way the team conducts its free agency. Even keeping one of those 2 around would have made a difference. Or spending the money on another starting receiver that was available in free agency but instead we chose not to. All I know is we have a starting boundary receiver with 26 receptions for 385 career yards & just 2 TDs receiving before this season started . When I see those Wheatfall & Stearns playing very well elsewhere all it tells me that in the coaches meetings last season, we had Hogan telling O'Shea & everyone else in that room that it wasn't subpar coaching that made them play at such a craptacular level. It was the players fault.

55 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

We get rid of Wheatfall & Stearns but we don't sign two players to replace them. That sure seems to be the way the team conducts its free agency. Even keeping one of those 2 around would have made a difference. Or spending the money on another starting receiver that was available in free agency but instead we chose not to. All I know is we have a starting boundary receiver with 26 receptions for 385 career yards & just 2 TDs receiving before this season started . When I see those Wheatfall & Stearns playing very well elsewhere all it tells me that in the coaches meetings last season, we had Hogan telling O'Shea & everyone else in that room that it wasn't subpar coaching that made them play at such a craptacular level. It was the players fault.

Did we not sign White and Nield?

3 hours ago, Brandon said:

Did we not sign White and Nield?

Right cuz the o is the problem after 2?weeks. Ppl be insane after 1 loss.

2 hours ago, Goalie said:

Right cuz the o is the problem after 2?weeks. Ppl be insane after 1 loss.

Offence has dramatically improved over last year. Our problem in our loss this week was the D. I could give a crap what Wheatfall and Sterns did this week. They both had big games for us too..problem was they only produced 2 or 3 of them in a season. I'll call letting them go a mistake when they actually put up a decent season not just show the occasional flash.

They were two guys that the vast majority of this forum wanted gone. What's changed?

11 hours ago, Booch said:

Kelly looks like he did pre injury

Sucks to see Randolph that first Argo drive locking down right side of their oline...why we cut him...who knows

Broxton is why

Edited 21 hours ago21 hr by GCn20

3 hours ago, GCn20 said:

Offence has dramatically improved over last year. Our problem in our loss this week was the D. I could give a crap what Wheatfall and Sterns did this week. They both had big games for us too..problem was they only produced 2 or 3 of them in a season. I'll call letting them go a mistake when they actually put up a decent season not just show the occasional flash.

They were two guys that the vast majority of this forum wanted gone. What's changed?

Broxton is why

So...keep the 3 best tackles around..what if one goes down

Also have the ability to make tough choices.. keep randloph where he was..slide broxton to LT and u could.have 6 gamed Bryant..Nationalized him and "start" him and then sub out with Randoplh..many ways

If one our tackles goes out with season ender..we hooped

He would have been fine at RG too seeing as we had the fixation witj 3 American oline guys...it was pretty much predetermined we were running 3 Canadian receievers before camp even opened...regardless if we had the talent to do so...even when some American rookies outperformed the incumbent Canadians...they were thrown on the PR..Another case of better player sitting for inferior...make that makes sense when its not even needed to make ratio....

Thats assuming he wanted to be kept around. Some guys want to actually play and not wait around for an injury. Especially when they know they are starting quality players and there's a need on multiple teams. Why would Randolph stay?

Mos say said on the coaches show they offered multiple PR spots to players who chose not to stay. Guys bet on themselves sometimes.

And as others have mentioned, the Offense is in no way a problem. Unless Randolph can play DT I dont see how his presence changes anything.

Randolph is a big meh to me. His pass protection was horrible and a big reason why our O stank last season. See a massive difference changing him out for Broxton already. Collaros has a chance to get his eyes downfield and get the ball out without having to scramble every drop.

1 hour ago, Bigblue204 said:

Mos say said on the coaches show they offered multiple PR spots to players who chose not to stay. Guys bet on themselves sometimes.

This another reason why it's important to not have too many 'overpaid' contracts. It leaves room in the SMS to pay a few depth players more than the PR minimum.

1 hour ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Randolph is a big meh to me. His pass protection was horrible and a big reason why our O stank last season. See a massive difference changing him out for Broxton already. Collaros has a chance to get his eyes downfield and get the ball out without having to scramble every drop.

Well to be honest changin anyone for Broxton would be massive

The Condell effect with layered receivers and gguys running complimentary routes to free up space is also a huge difference

I saw zero issues in Randophs game last night...sure its one game but he also another yr older and experienced...just like Wheatfall..was basically a rookie last yr so for sure you would think yr 2 as a starter he would take it up a notch..and seems he has..he schooled us mighty fine...and played well previous game fumble or not..everyone has fumbled

17 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

We get rid of Wheatfall & Stearns but we don't sign two players to replace them. That sure seems to be the way the team conducts its free agency. Even keeping one of those 2 around would have made a difference. Or spending the money on another starting receiver that was available in free agency but instead we chose not to. All I know is we have a starting boundary receiver with 26 receptions for 385 career yards & just 2 TDs receiving before this season started . When I see those Wheatfall & Stearns playing very well elsewhere all it tells me that in the coaches meetings last season, we had Hogan telling O'Shea & everyone else in that room that it wasn't subpar coaching that made them play at such a craptacular level. It was the players fault.

The Gavin Cobb obsession is now bordering on delusion. We signed Tim White and Tommy Nield, what on earth are you on about

10 minutes ago, Mike said:

The Gavin Cobb obsession is now bordering on delusion. We signed Tim White and Tommy Nield, what on earth are you on about

We have a receiver who contributes little or nothing. If we had a boundary receiver who could get open you don't think it would make it that much harder for defenses to defend? That someone may be open downfield because the defense can't cover everyone? There were other free agents available we passed on who could have helped us.

21 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

We have a receiver who contributes little or nothing. If we had a boundary receiver who could get open you don't think it would make it that much harder for defenses to defend? That someone may be open downfield because the defense can't cover everyone? There were other free agents available we passed on who could have helped us.

He had 4 less receiving yards than Kenny lawler last game on 1 less catch. I mean do you think all our receivers should be pushing 100 yards cuz besides Cobb, Nield was over 100. Wilson was close, Demski And white each had 79 yards. Brady had 51 receiving. The last option had 4 less yards than lawler.

57 minutes ago, Goalie said:

He had 4 less receiving yards than Kenny lawler last game on 1 less catch. I mean do you think all our receivers should be pushing 100 yards cuz besides Cobb, Nield was over 100. Wilson was close, Demski And white each had 79 yards. Brady had 51 receiving. The last option had 4 less yards than lawler.

OMFG, you're comparing Cobb to Lawler?? What are you smoking??? Lol,

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

OMFG, you're comparing Cobb to Lawler?? What are you smoking??? Lol,

… I feel like you stick to an opinion and you are literally just unable to process a different viewpoint. He’s not comparing Cobb to Lawler. He’s saying he’s our fifth option, other guys had huge games. Not every receiver is going to get 100 yards a game. Our offense is clicking and you’re bitching and whining that we didn’t invest into THREE free agent receiver big ticket items (and also somehow forgetting that you pretended we didn’t sign ANY)