TBURGESS

That's kind of the point. Give it to the 'Eye in the Sky' and take it away from the coaches.

I don't have any idea who he is, but this is tragic for him and his family.

I do think they let up, but that's not the point. The Bombers players and fans can tell themselves that they played great in the second half and if they just played that well in the first half, they'd have killed the Stamps. That's what keeps the confidence intact.

The ref, who was the closest to the ball, saw it as a catch. It took slow mo and enhanced video to over turn it. I guess your definition of obvious is different than mine. I'm not saying it wasn't a legitimate challenge. I'm saying it wasn't an obvious challenge and it didn't have any effect on the outcome of the game, except to slow it down. I don't think the game would suffer at all if we removed the challenge system from the coaches. The refs back in Toronto are already looking at every turn over, TD and if players are in or out. It's not that much more to look at the non-obvious catches too.

I've been wondering the same thing. If the game had been over at the half, then I could see us losing a ton of confidence and maybe go into a 'death spiral', but the way we played the second half makes me think that the confidence is intact so I don't think we will see a loss cycle unless we lose to Edmonton too.

Calgary looked unbeatable in the first half and they dropped a few passes that would have run the score way up out of reach. We played the better second half, but lost anyway. If Calgary had made the FG that hit the upright, our last TD wouldn't have mattered in the least. Neither would the last 20 seconds. They'd just have gone into victory formation. Letting Calgary, without Grant, McDaniels and Messem get that last second FG was heartbreaking and it showed that Calgary is never out of a game. A lesson that BC found out a couple of games ago.

Sure, it was a corrected mistake, but it certainly wasn't an obvious one and it didn't make any difference to the game. Dickenson just used a challenge to get the first down back. BTW: That was a catch/no catch situation which could have been challenged from the 'eye in the sky' to get it right.

{Sarcastica Font}Trash talking in football? Hold the front page. This is big news. {/Sarcastica Font} I don't know why anyone takes these things so personally. BLM was right at the half. If he'd said it after the game, then 'Idiot BLM' would be appropriate. I like that kind of interview way better than the homogenized 'we just gotta cut down on the mistakes' kind. They are boring and add nothing to the game. BLM certainly wasn't boring and added some spark.

Moving the ball on 3rd and inches? All centers do it. Refs let them except for once or twice a decade, but they decide to call it when the games on the line and it becomes a game changer? Challenges are getting worse and worse as the year goes on. Illegal contact gets called away from the play and it doesn't matter if the receiver or the DB are the ones who initiate contact. PI gets called even if you can't see it at full speed. Looking at this weekend, I can't see a single challenge that overturned an obvious mistake. Coaches throw the flag 'just to see' if they can find something to overturn good plays or to extend drives. The only thing that challenges are good for IMO is to determine if it's a catch or not and if the player is in or out of bounds and those don't need to be coaches challenges.

I didn't realize how many players Hamilton has on the IR. Yikes. Too late to change my pick? Yah I know it is.

3 Stars: Denmark - 9 catches and a great TD Leggett - 6 tackles and great coverage taking away a big play late in the 4th Flanders - The 50 yard TD was our only bright spot in the first half. Without it we wouldn't have had any chance. Happy Honker: Burnett - Forced the fumble that got Bass the TD

Great game for Edmonton. BC played a great 1st quarter. Edmonton played 3 good quarters. Bell had a huge night. BC just couldn't stop him even when they knew he was going to run the ball. Made BC look more beatable than I thought they'd be.

A little different look at the remaining 6 games: Riders and Montreal are all but mathematically eliminated. The last 6 games are about next year. Makes them the easy games. Toronto ain't going to get any better with their QB situation. I doubt they make the playoffs. Likely in next year territory too. Hamilton need to fix their special teams and learn to play 4 full quarters. Ottawa and Edmonton need to fix their defenses. Calgary, BC and Winnipeg need to keep doing what they're doing to remain competitive. These will be the hard games.

Ahead of that Rookie HC Wally Buono!

Medlock is expensive and worth it. I no longer hold my breath when we line up for a FG, no matter how far out it is. Medlock has changed the way the coaches make their decisions. We can now go for long FG's instead of punting because we aren't out of Medlock's range. I don't think we'd be on our current win streak without him.

Rich asked me a question. I answered it. While I'm really happy with the current win streak, especially the last quarter of the last game, I've seen tons of streaks come to an end and the teams were unable to restart them. Several examples from the Bombers recent past come to mind. Picking the best couple of months work out of 2.5 years of futility is no way to make rational business decisions. Most folks really want the win streak to be the real O'Shea and say that all the losing before that doesn't matter. This win streak provides the first actual evidence that we may be heading in the right direction. While W/L is the stat that matters the most, it's not the only thing that matters. You have to include the level of competition and their QB problems. If O'Shea can't get us a home playoff game or win a playoff game in 3 years of trying, at the very least, it should effect the contract length and dollars involved. Right now, we don't know if he can. We don't even know if he has built a team that can beat another +.500 team yet, so new contract talk is premature IMO.

I said at the beginning of the season that a home playoff game was my answer to what O'Shea needed to do to get an extension. Simply making the playoffs wasn't enough then and is certainly not enough now that we've got 8 wins with 6 games left because that means winning one or two out in the last third of the season. It depends on which playoff game we are in and how we play. If it's an at home game and we are close but no cigar, then sure, I'd extend O'Shea. If it's a blowout game in someone else's field (IE if we are 3rd or a cross over), then I'd think long and hard about if O'Shea has shown enough over 3 years to get an extension. No playoff wins would definitely affect the extension offer... 2, not 3 years and the dollars would be less than winning a playoff game or at least hosting one. That's another reason I'd wait until the season is over to extend O'Shea.

Short memories is right. Most folks around here can't remember past the last 7 games. We were 1-4 after going 5-13 in 2015 after going 7-11 in 2013. We hadn't even won 2 games in a row for more than a year, let alone had a winning streak. BTW: What's the downside to waiting to see how the season ends before giving O'Shea a new contract?

2 or less wins in the last 6 games. Showing we can't beat the +.500 teams. 1 and done in the playoffs. If we collapse we don't want to have a head coach with a shiny brand new, more expensive, guaranteed contract. Extending O'Shea in the middle of his second win streak in 2.75 years when we are going into the toughest part of our schedule is the same thinking that the Bombers used when they extended Willy, gave him a big contract, after having a great 6 games back in 2014.

Thorpe

You don't fault O'Shea for anything.

Win-able? Sure. Likely? Not so much. Calgary is the best team in the league for a reason. They won't take us lightly, because we've won 7 in a row and because we are right behind them in the standings. BLM doesn't take many sacks, he doesn't throw many picks and we've won most of our games because we take the ball away so often. This game is a real measuring stick as to where we are right now. Win and we can be considered elite. Lose and we will be considered with the 2nd tier teams.

Continuity is only good when we're winning. Continuity is highly over rated otherwise. Examples: Continuity was keeping MB from 2013-15. Change was bringing in PLAP. Continuity would have been to keep starting Willy, Neufeld and M Harris. Change is Nichols, Bond/Hardrick and Loffler.

Not surprised. Miller/Walters/O'Shea have always thought they were on the right track, even when the wins weren't there. The last 7 wins show they are on the right track, at least for right now. I'd wait until the end of the season to see where we end up and if we win a playoff game or not before talking extensions, but then again, I'd have waited to see if Willy really was a top tier QB before paying like he was too.