WBBFanWest

I laughed when I read his comments and I wanted to take him aside and explain that he would be better off not lecturing people who have been following this team for their entire lives who "we" are.

Apparently, we're calling those things "theories" now.

Except for the colour and the design, there was nothing wrong with those signature uniforms at all.

So some people are thinking that it's a bad thing to bring in people, give them a look, and if they aren't what we're looking for, release them and move on? Personally, I like the approach because at the very least it gives us a jump on TC next year. Hopefully, we'll find some players that we want to invite back next year and we'll avoid ones that we've already seen and found wanting. And who knows we might even find a keeper or two in the meantime.

So wait... On the one hand you said "I also find it amusing to see how many people take things at face value." in reference to what O'Shea said about releasing Boyd and now you're quoting him to support your theory? Pretty convenient way of trying to make your argument. Not overly effective, but convenient. I'm still waiting to hear what evidence supports your theory, by the way. I have no evidence, that's why it's called a "theory". If I had evidence it would be a "fact". I'm speculating.In my opinion it's a likely theory, but it's just a theory. Ah, so what you're doing is speculating. And doing so without any evidence. So essentially you are denigrating the character of the head coach, accusing him of lying to the media, without any basis whatsoever. Nice. I have a theory about people who do stuff like that, but I'll have the good taste not to expand upon it further.

So after watching the Montreal debacle does anyone still want to rush to Glenn's defense? Yeah there were more problems than just him but he was pretty crap all on his own.Well Nichols couldn't play after just joining a new team, Glenn could, still coming up Glenn.Yes, because the circumstances between Winnipeg and Montreal were exactly the same, right? And in any case, a loss is a loss is a loss, so the fact that they rushed Glenn out there lead to exactly the same result as us not rushing Nichols into action. Dang that relentless logic. Always getting in the way. Exactly lol. He looked horrible cuz he had minimal reps with offense. Just like nichols woulda with minimal reps. If we did throw him into the breech, the same complainers would say we set him up to fail or hes obviously garbage, etc etc.. There is no winning with some posters here.. No, the point I'm making was that there was some suggestion that because Glenn was sent in with minimal reps, that that somehow makes him better/superior than Nichols. But clearly, when looking at the results, it neither supports nor refutes the argument.

So wait... On the one hand you said "I also find it amusing to see how many people take things at face value." in reference to what O'Shea said about releasing Boyd and now you're quoting him to support your theory? Pretty convenient way of trying to make your argument. Not overly effective, but convenient. I'm still waiting to hear what evidence supports your theory, by the way.

There's people on the other Bomber forum thinking the same as me. It's actually very a likely theory on what happened. There are also people that think Elvis is still with us and the US was responsible for the 9/11 attacks in NY. So what, exactly, is the evidence that supports your theory?

I also find it amusing to see how many people take things at face value. And "off field issues" could be anything, including my theory.And ya, O'Shea is nothing but forthcoming with the media So explain to me exactly how the conspiracy that you put forward actually helps the Bombers in any way. A player has been released from the PR. It's done all the time for any number of reasons across the league. How do you think that lying about the reason would help the Bombers? I think that, given the fact that the league is so small and that eventually, other teams would find out the "real" reason, the Bombers would be taking a huge risk of looking like complete and total jackasses, willing to say anything, to lie about the reasons for releasing someone when they had no good reason to do so. In that case, how do you think they'd be viewed across the league? But hey, I get it, conspiracy plots are way more fun that the boring old facts. Personally, I heard that Miller ordered it because the real reason that Boyd was released was that he found out what the secret ingredient in booster juice is and he was getting ready to tell the world. Soylent something or other... Moreso than they have in the past couple of years?

So after watching the Montreal debacle does anyone still want to rush to Glenn's defense? Yeah there were more problems than just him but he was pretty crap all on his own. Well Nichols couldn't play after just joining a new team, Glenn could, still coming up Glenn. Yes, because the circumstances between Winnipeg and Montreal were exactly the same, right? And in any case, a loss is a loss is a loss, so the fact that they rushed Glenn out there lead to exactly the same result as us not rushing Nichols into action. Dang that relentless logic. Always getting in the way.

I also find it amusing to see how many people take things at face value. And "off field issues" could be anything, including my theory.And ya, O'Shea is nothing but forthcoming with the media So explain to me exactly how the conspiracy that you put forward actually helps the Bombers in any way. A player has been released from the PR. It's done all the time for any number of reasons across the league. How do you think that lying about the reason would help the Bombers? I think that, given the fact that the league is so small and that eventually, other teams would find out the "real" reason, the Bombers would be taking a huge risk of looking like complete and total jackasses, willing to say anything, to lie about the reasons for releasing someone when they had no good reason to do so. In that case, how do you think they'd be viewed across the league? But hey, I get it, conspiracy plots are way more fun that the boring old facts. Personally, I heard that Miller ordered it because the real reason that Boyd was released was that he found out what the secret ingredient in booster juice is and he was getting ready to tell the world. Soylent something or other...

O'Shea said he was released because of off field issues. Do you really think that O'Shea would make stuff up in order to somehow save face? He doesn't strike me as a guy would would publicly lie about something as straight forward as releasing a guy of the PR, because there's no benefit to him or the organization in doing so. It's always amusing to see how many people can try to find a conspiracy behind any situation.

Or... it was off field issues.

So after watching the Montreal debacle does anyone still want to rush to Glenn's defense? Yeah there were more problems than just him but he was pretty crap all on his own. It was a first game after two practices. Lets wait until next game to pass judgement. I seem to recall Glenn saying that it would only take him a day or to to learn a new playbook. Seems he might have been a little off in his estimate. I'd agree with you except for the fact that Glenn looked a lot like this during his time with Saskatchewan. He's well past his best before date and it really shows, practices not withstanding.

So after watching the Montreal debacle does anyone still want to rush to Glenn's defense? Yeah there were more problems than just him but he was pretty crap all on his own.

I'd assume that any good coach would take into account the relative strengths and weaknesses of his players when designing a strategy and do what he can to ensure that the player is question has every opportunity to be successful. Isn't that exactly how it's supposed to work?

Or some of us have seen what continual housecleaning every two or so years has done to this team. I see some good things in O'Shea (and no, I'm not a fan. I wasn't happy when Walters hired him) and I'm willing to see what can happen with him as HC. This assumes, of course, that he actually hires a competent OC. If, as has been said, he wants to keep MB after the season, then that tells me everything I need to know.

If Hurl is playing close to the line pre snap, then which of the following is more likely: A) He's doing what he wants, where he wants and when he wants because no DC or HC is going to tell him how to do his job. The strategy calls for him to do that. I'm going with B, so that means that the guy responsible for Hurl playing where he does is Hall and I think that Hall probably has good reasons for doing that.

I'm always amazed at how people seem to have no idea at all what a CEO does and yet still believe that they can declare this one or that one a fail because of things that are completely outside that person's responsibility. The win/loss record? CEO can't do a whole bunch about that. Sure he can fire the GM, but seeing that the CEO is not a ticked off "Fire everyone all the time" fan who actually knows little to nothing about running an organization, he's not going to give those sorts of people the knee jerk reaction that they so desperately crave. And as for the Winter Classic, Miller is not employed by the NHL so the good of the NHL does not factor factor into his thinking. If he believes that the Winter Classic will hurt the organization's hosting of the Grey Cup, and the teams bottom line, he absolutely should send Bettman packing. And personally, the more people who send Bettman packing the better, but that's another discussion altogether. Miller is watching the product out on the field, I'm quite sure. If he decides that the best action is to get rid of Walters he will. But he won't do it because a few rabid "fire everyone" fans think its the perfect solution for every problem.

Seeing that the GM hires the HC and the HC hires the OC, I'm not sure why you'd bring up the CEO because the only one he's hired is the GM. And I'm not trying to defend Walters appointment as GM, just trying to introduce a little bit of desperately needed logic.

Will we? With our offense? Keep the faith. I understand that MB is going to try something different. Instead of 5 yard curls they're going to run 6 yard curls. He's a wild man OC...

To quote Eddie Murphy.... What have you done for me lately? and that is the problem with glenn. sure. hes been in the league for 15 years as a starter and backup, hence his numbers but nothing screams out at me as starter material.. backup? Yup. Nichols too seems backup worthy only but he still has a chance to improve.. glenn is on downswing and of course anyone whos a fan of the CFL can attest to glenns lack of interest and fire in the belly coupled with his love of 4th quarter INT or fumbles.. Not to mention his Brock Ralphesque love of contact and rattleability.. He's 28 already and been around the league for several years, just how much improvement do we really expect out of the guy? Considering this seasons statistics only Glenn has a better passer rating too, and considering the absolute **** show that the Riders are that means a lot. Old man Glenn on a massively dysfunctional team is better than Nichols. You are letting your massive bias against Kevin Glenn cloud your judgement here. Glenn has been a legit starter in the CFL many tmes, Nichols has never been able to do that and I don't see it ever happening either. He's played in parts of three seasons, so that's "several"? Having MB as your coordinator is not something that's likely going to lead to a lot of success. And if you hadn't noticed, the Bombers really can't be described as a powerhouse either. And your massive bias FOR Kevin Glenn clouds yours. Not for a while he hasn't. And we're not talking about the Glenn of years gone by because that's completely irrelevant. The only valid comparison is who they are right now and what they might be like moving forward. And as I see it you are talking about two guys who are both backups at this point. And what about Nichols time in Edmonton? They tried to give him starter reps a bunch there and kept moving on to raw rookies in favour of him. People don't like Glenn I get it, he's got his flaws, but he's a pretty good qb when there's no pressure to win where as Nichols is a pretty mediocre back up qb. Noticed that you really didn't address any of my points with your "relentless logic" You've gone from arguing that Glenn is "head and shoulders" above Nichols to suggesting that Glenn is a pretty good QB when there's no pressure. That's pretty much the definition of a mediocre QB in my book because if you're only good when there's no pressure, you're pretty much useless at this time of the year. Nichols at least seems to have a bit of fire, so between the two of them this October, I'd rather have Nichols.

To quote Eddie Murphy.... What have you done for me lately? and that is the problem with glenn. sure. hes been in the league for 15 years as a starter and backup, hence his numbers but nothing screams out at me as starter material.. backup? Yup. Nichols too seems backup worthy only but he still has a chance to improve.. glenn is on downswing and of course anyone whos a fan of the CFL can attest to glenns lack of interest and fire in the belly coupled with his love of 4th quarter INT or fumbles.. Not to mention his Brock Ralphesque love of contact and rattleability.. He's 28 already and been around the league for several years, just how much improvement do we really expect out of the guy? Considering this seasons statistics only Glenn has a better passer rating too, and considering the absolute **** show that the Riders are that means a lot. Old man Glenn on a massively dysfunctional team is better than Nichols. You are letting your massive bias against Kevin Glenn cloud your judgement here. Glenn has been a legit starter in the CFL many tmes, Nichols has never been able to do that and I don't see it ever happening either. He's played in parts of three seasons, so that's "several"? Having MB as your coordinator is not something that's likely going to lead to a lot of success. And if you hadn't noticed, the Bombers really can't be described as a powerhouse either. And your massive bias FOR Kevin Glenn clouds yours. Not for a while he hasn't. And we're not talking about the Glenn of years gone by because that's completely irrelevant. The only valid comparison is who they are right now and what they might be like moving forward. And as I see it you are talking about two guys who are both backups at this point.

Getting too cold outside...

Our half time is not long, so if you want people to perform in the center of the field, you really can't have much, if any stage there. So that means that the stage has to go at one end of the stadium or the other, I'm at a loss as to where else one could put it. Don't see too much conspiracy here. Haven't they put the stage for the half time show for pretty much every other Grey Cup in the past two decades on the field? I'm pretty sure other Grey Cups have even managed to have the stage in the middle of the field. Suddenly now, in 2015 the half time is not long enough to do it? Yes, time moves faster now, or hadn't you noticed? If you hadn't, you will... trust me! I could very well be mistaken. I don't pay attention to the half time show in general, but from my recollection, if they were on the field, I really didn't notice a stage, as such. It would seem to me that having a fixed and ready stage at one end would allow for more elaborate planning of the act (pyrotechnics, lights and other "eye candy") than might otherwise be practical. This was 2013 in Saskatchewan: Ah! That explains it. I stopped watching that game before the half was over. Couldn't bear to watch.