Geebrr

Eric Tillman abusing the roster rules once again. It's a ******* joke.

I didn't compare the talent, I compared the tendency for people to think they know better. Id wager money people were excited to see Sunseri play over Durant last year... How'd that go?

Or maybe he just wants to play football but is either not good enough, not handling his life under the microscope very well, or both.

It's understandable. I'm leery of someone who says they don't want extra attention just wants to play football, yet signs up for a reality tv show and agrees to hold a press conference announcing his signing in Montreal. I think if he really didn't want extra attention he might have asked what happens when every other American player who washed out of the NFL before even playing a meaningful game signs in the CFL and said let's do that. I respect that he's being open and there's a risk in that, but it's pretty clear that the media attention is something he's playing into at this point, not trying to avoid.Kind of presumptions for any of us to know the pressures being put on the young man, and undoubtedly being pulled in a million different directions.You can guess his intentions, and you could be right or wrong, but the reality is you have no context to base it in. I doubt Michael Sam asked for a press conference, and I doubt he truly wanted a reality show, quite frankly. Team: Hey Michael, we'd like you to be at a press conference to announce your signing.Sam: You know, I'm just here to play. I'd rather not, if it's all the same. Thanks. Agent: Hey Michael, want to do a reality show? Sam: No. I'm thinking that it might not have been as hard as you're suggesting. And I'm willing to bet he has way more pressure than you give it credit. People follow this story, and this player, on and off the field.

No slight to Danny Mac, his career speaks for itself, but I bet people wanted him to play over Dunigan. What people? His mom and dad?In what world would anyone have wanted anyone to replace Dunigan? "Sorry, please put in Danny, I don't like seeing Dunigan throw for 750 yards. That's just showboating." I bet they existed. Not in your context, but liking him over Dunigan.

It's understandable. I'm leery of someone who says they don't want extra attention just wants to play football, yet signs up for a reality tv show and agrees to hold a press conference announcing his signing in Montreal. I think if he really didn't want extra attention he might have asked what happens when every other American player who washed out of the NFL before even playing a meaningful game signs in the CFL and said let's do that. I respect that he's being open and there's a risk in that, but it's pretty clear that the media attention is something he's playing into at this point, not trying to avoid. Kind of presumptions for any of us to know the pressures being put on the young man, and undoubtedly being pulled in a million different directions. You can guess his intentions, and you could be right or wrong, but the reality is you have no context to base it in. I doubt Michael Sam asked for a press conference, and I doubt he truly wanted a reality show, quite frankly.

No slight to Danny Mac, his career speaks for itself, but I bet people wanted him to play over Dunigan.

People really seem to have extra dislike for Michael Sam.

Paul Wiecek corrected for saying in a story that the Bombers hadn't won in Calgary since 2002. Thankfully for him, nobody reads his stories, or expects them to be accurate.

All the best to him, tough break, and bad timing.

At least you remain in NDP territory.

Too bad that Allen had a poor showing. I was hoping he could find a spot given his hype, but he clearly failed to impress. Another example of college play not being the be all and end all of career trajectory.

Haha...can't see Cauchy fitting in well playing closer to the LOS

With this one post you did more reporting than every media guy in the city yesterday combined. We thank you. But damn, I want to hear how the pump looked today. Is it still there? Did they replace it with another pump? And, if so, how does that impact on our Super Bowl hopes?

With this one post you did more reporting than every media guy in the city yesterday combined. We thank you.

Richards! OMFG! Amidst reports he doesn't want to play here, even!

Agreed. Plus, boring as it can be, special teams are the difference between making or not making the roster for a lot of guys.

Troy Kopp helped beat the Riders in the highlight of that year. He wasn't a starter either

Goltz showed enough to show he wasn't a starter.

I did used to think that if a game was tied at the closing seconds, a team shouldn't have to lose a game because somebody shanked a FG and the ball either went out the back of the endzone or the opposing team failed to get it out, That to me was something I originally saw as a bad play that was falsely rewarded, but as you can't really just kill a clock and run it down to the closing seconds that easily, and as that scenario doesn't happen too much in this league, it actually does add a great twist to the game. Plus the opposing team if they can't get it out can also kick it back out of the endzone into the field of play if I recall right, so there is that. Plus it can also be a benefit to a team that's down by 1, misses a fg, and gets a rouge out of it. Plus as opponents get the ball at the 35 yardline, most teams aren't going to go for it. I feel the same. I used to, but do not anymore. We have each done 180s.

why do you get 2 points on a safety? Why 3 when you kick the ball through the uprights? Why 6 when you advance the ball into the endzone? Because it's in the rules that's why. You shouldn't get a point for missing a field goal, but yes a rule is a rule. Throw back to our rugby roots or not .. the concept of rewarding failure sucks. Yup. Apparently we can make the OT an Arcade game, but the loser point stays. There are loser points in hockey for losing in OT or the Shootout. And that rule has only been in place for a decade or two... At least it goes away in the playoffs.

why do you get 2 points on a safety? Why 3 when you kick the ball through the uprights? Why 6 when you advance the ball into the endzone? Because it's in the rules that's why. You shouldn't get a point for missing a field goal, but yes a rule is a rule. It's not a point for missing a field goal, it a point for kicking a ball into the endzone and preventing the other team from returning it out of the endzone. Then give a point on turnovers in the end zone. More excitement!

And they want to move to a pay per read system.

I would trade that for not losing a game on a loser point. Personally. The vast vast majority of the time nothing happens on those plays. Vast.

But the play doesn't happen unless you miss a field goal. Aguy intercepts or recovers a fumble, his team doesn't give up a point for not getting it out of the end zone. I just don't like the rule.