TBURGESS

The point is that when he looked good the book wasn't out on Printers yet and teams didn't play to just keep him in the pocket. Once he came back and people knew what he was about they took away his legs and he couldn't beat them with his arm. We simply don't know if Marve can do that yet. Being able to scramble and run is a good asset for a qb to have, but they still need to be able to pass from the pocket first and foremost. Agree to disagree. There's more than one way to be a good QB. If you're a Ricky Ray type, that's from the pocket. If you're a Flutie or Reilly type then it's from moving the pocket around and using your legs when needed. Printers had a great year, went to the NFL, wasn't the same when he came back. He turned out to be a one trick pony. His biggest problem wasn't throwing from the pocket, it was that he wasn't the brightest bulb in the box and his team wouldn't go the extra mile for him. Marve's had less than 60 minutes of playing time behind a horrid O line. Of course we don't know if he can pass from the pocket yet. Being a pocket passer is a good asset to have, but it's not the be all and end all of playing QB.

Not my call. Haven't been to camp to see them. Don't have access to the meetings, film, etc. Coaches make those decisions.

If you were Tburg...it was today. What a load of ____. According to CFL.CA First Roster Cuts – Sunday, June 14 Prior to 11:59pm ET on Sunday June 14, all CFL teams must reduce their roster to 65 players. Final Roster Cuts – Saturday, June 20 As of 10:00pm ET on Saturday, teams are required to reduce their roster of players under contract to 46 active players (excluding 6-game injured and those transferred to the one game injured list). Three of the active players must be identified as quarterbacks and a team must carry a minimum of 20 National players. Also known as ‘Cut-Down Day’.

Its the way you write your posts that makes me skip over them usually That's preferable to whining about them. For a guy who always says "argue the post, not the poster", you sure do have an interesting habit of always turning everything into a personal matter. Just wish you were a little more honest with yourself, not even with us. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to observe the fact that you love the role you play around here as the forum agitator. That's not me Mike. I don't turn everything into a personal matter. I simply don't back down when others do. Sure, I like to agitate. Makes folks think and it can be a lot of fun. Keeps the conversations going too. TrueBlue... 'Obviously not trying to win' is simply a statement of fact based on the lineup. You really think that lineup shows a desire to win the game? It doesn't. I'd like to see more of the vets get some reps to work the rust off. Not a lot of time, but some. I'd like to see what some of our better rookies look like beside our vets rather than getting a look at rookie after rookie after rookie, most of whom won't start again. I'd be very reluctant to put Willy out behind that O line. Seems like a recipe for failure rather than success and success breeds more success IMO. No, that's actually not a fact. We've never seen this lineup together before in any type of game, so stating that anyone is not trying to win is strictly your opinion, and only an opinion. Do I think that lineup shows a desire to win the game? My answer is: Does it really matter? To quote Tim Burke: "If we win, we win." Vets will get worked in more next week, you know that. Tim Burke??? Yup, that's the way to make a point around here. You won't admit that the roster hasn't been built to win? I'm certain we have better players than we are sending. So yah... it's a fact that the roster doesn't show a desire to win this game. It shows a desire to give a lot guys a shot at making the team. In a lot of cases, their last shot, but that's not the same thing at all. Your question of 'does it matter?' is a very different question than 'have we sent a roster built to win?'. I can see the argument for sending a roster of second, third and fourth string players to give them a chance. I don't agree with it, but I can see it. I'm fairly certain that the coaches already have a good idea, barring injuries, what most of the team will look like this year. I'm for giving the guys with the best chance the most reps with the guys who will be their teammates this year. That would mean sending less fringe players this week. We can always play them next week when we can carry a bigger roster. I'm strongly in favour of doing our best to win each and every time we step on the field. It's an expectation that needs to be instilled in the team as soon as possible. I'd rather see guys like Westerman and Hajrullahu than the guys we sent to play their spots. I'd rather see our top 2 receivers giving the QB's a better shot at looking good than the guys we sent. I could go on, but you get my point. Is my way the only way? Of course not! Never said it was.

Of course we aren't going to bring 80 players. 1. Lots of the guys on tomorrow's roster aren't on the bubble. Most won't start again for us. 2. Lots of the guys who stayed home don't have their spots locked up. 3. When players get hurt, I've never suggested that they shouldn't have been there, let alone going on and on about it.

Its the way you write your posts that makes me skip over them usually That's preferable to whining about them. For a guy who always says "argue the post, not the poster", you sure do have an interesting habit of always turning everything into a personal matter. Just wish you were a little more honest with yourself, not even with us. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to observe the fact that you love the role you play around here as the forum agitator. That's not me Mike. I don't turn everything into a personal matter. I simply don't back down when others do. Sure, I like to agitate. Makes folks think and it can be a lot of fun. Keeps the conversations going too. TrueBlue... 'Obviously not trying to win' is simply a statement of fact based on the lineup. You really think that lineup shows a desire to win the game? It doesn't. I'd like to see more of the vets get some reps to work the rust off. Not a lot of time, but some. I'd like to see what some of our better rookies look like beside our vets rather than getting a look at rookie after rookie after rookie, most of whom won't start again. I'd be very reluctant to put Willy out behind that O line. Seems like a recipe for failure rather than success and success breeds more success IMO.

You actually think I'm ripping anyone a new one with my posts these days? LOL. You seem to have forgotten what it looks like when I'm ripping someone a new one. Go back and see my posts regarding Kelly or Mack if you want to see what it really looks like.

If the opposing defence plays contain, they'll have to commit more players to the LOS. That should open up receivers downfield. The key is finding them and getting the ball to them. Can Marve do that? Don't know for sure yet, but he certainly has the arm for it. You want to compare Marve to Printers who looked like a world beater in Wally's offense which got him an NFL shot. Marve's no where near that yet. I'd compare him more to Reilly when he was in BC. Not ready yet, but I've seen a spark that makes me want to see more.

Its the way you write your posts that makes me skip over them usually That's preferable to whining about them.

Why do you keep bringing that up? Nobody, but nobody, is trying to turn Marve into strictly a pocket passer. But why you are missing is the suggestion that Marve must be able to show the ability to pass from the pocket. There's a big difference. It's not me bringing it up. I was replying to a post where the poster said that Marve needs to prove himself as a pocket passer. That's pure bunk. I'm not 'Missing anything', I'm disagreeing with the premise. There's more than one way to play QB effectively. You're splitting hairs by using the word 'strictly'. Marve is a scrambler with a big arm who's accurate on the run. He doesn't just run the ball, he extends plays with his legs and throws. That's something that most QB's can't do, Willy included. Before anyone goes off about how I hate Willy or how I think Marve should be our starting QB, that's not what I'm saying. Willy is our best pocket passer. I have zero problems with him being our #1 QB. I'd like to see him get pulled earlier in games he isn't being effective, but that's a coaching issue IMO, not a QB one.

What a lot of crap from some posters. For the record (Although it shouldn't need to be said) I wouldn't be here if I didn't bleed blue and gold and I love the Bombers I like about 90% of the changes this offseason I don't sign on to find something to complain about. I sign on to discuss Football. I totally understand what preseason games are for and that they are extended practises. That's not the same as saying I like to see my team get beaten up by anyone. I'd watch the game if it was on TV or being streamed. I'll listen on CJOB if I can't watch. I take a ton of crap on these forums simply because I don't agree with everything the Bombers do. (Maybe it's because I'm right way more often than I'm wrong) If you don't like my opinion, then disagree with it. Argue the post, not the poster.

One of the big reasons Hurl signed with us in the first place is because he would be given a chance to start here. The Riders, who've seen Hurl daily for 3 years and had him as a starter for 5 games, don't see him as a starter. Either they are wrong, or we are wrong, or it takes a different level of talent to be a Bomber starter than a Rider starter.

No one should expect that it will look like a regular season game because there will be tons of changes in personal, but folks should expect CFL quality players because that's what every player out there wants to be. The point of preseason is to find out who can play well with and against CFL calibre talent. A 90% rookie team doesn't tell you anything about playing with CFL quality talent. Assuming Toronto plays their first team guys for less than a quarter, it doesn't tell you much about playing against CFL quality talent either. I didn't agree with it when we got beat 52-0 in a preseason game a couple of years ago and I don't agree with it now. Hopefully the next preseason game will have most of our starters in for the first quarter or so so we get a look at where were really at this year.

Based on the depth chart, the team isn't interested in winning the first pre season game so I hope there's lots of work for Brohm and Marve so the coaches can see which is the better choice for #2 QB. The O line we're sending to TO is better for Marve's style of game than Brohm's. Brohm 'isn't a terrible option' is hardly a glowing endorsement of our #2 QB. I agree that it's his job to lose though. Trying to turn Marve into a pocket passer is a horrible idea because it doesn't play to his strengths. It would be like trying to turn Willy into a scrambler so he's not a one dimensional pocket QB. Reilly scrambles and runs and is pretty darn effective. I'd love to have that kind of change of pace at #2.

Why's that? Very few of our starters are on the depth chart. Watching Willy behind that O line would bring back bad memories from last year. We're obviously not trying to win the game with that group, just looking at the players so I doubt it's going to be much of game.

Looking at the depth chart for the game, it's probably a good thing it won't be televised.

I don't like one dimensional QB's, but I can't say that Marve's a one dimensional QB yet. He had very little choice but to move around last year because of the O line. I don't think that means he can't read a defense. I suppose it could be true, but there isn't enough evidence either way yet. QB's need to do what they do well to be competitive. Marve uses his feet and throws very well on the move. He has the arm to throw from the pocket for sure, but I don't think that's the way to use his best attributes. I don't think he will get a sniff in the NFL next year, no matter what he wants unless he starts for most of the season and plays lights out. I have no expectation that either will be true. I could see him as the #2 this year if Brohm flames out.

I'll never understand why folks want to make a scrambling QB into a pocket passer. Scramblers can be very effective. Flutie for example was a terrific scrambler. He rarely won games from the pocket. He moved the pocket around to gain extra time to throw. Now, I'm not suggesting that Marve is Flutie like. That would be dumb at this point in time. I am, however, suggesting that a scrambling QB can get the job done if the offense is set up correctly.

That truly sucks. I was looking forward to seeing his returns.

It's a business. If the coach doesn't think any player has it anymore, then it's time to replace them. It shouldn't matter if the player has 1 year or a ton of years under his belt. BC gave McCallum a choice to retire or to be cut. He chose to be cut. Nothing the matter with that IMO.

Pencer left the practise field yesterday too. Trail of vomit behind him likely means he's not badly injured though.

O'Shea thinks everyone on the team is good in interviews. I haven't heard him say anything negative about any player or coach while they were on the team since he got to Winnipeg. Kuale? Big name MLB according to O'Shea. Kept starting him even though Wild was there. Etch? Running game doesn't matter according to O'Shea we'll be fine. Long losing streak last year? Blame no one, just keep trotting out the positives. Makes all his positive declarations kind of suspect IMO. (That's not the same as lying like one poster suggested yesterday.) Why was O'Shea annoyed at the MLB question yesterday? Who our MLB's going to be is one of the biggest stories in camp this year. It's one of the position battles to watch, yet O'Shea says something to the reporter like "Your going to ask that question?". Praise for Hurl's intangibles, not his measurables. Runs well and doesn't have to think about it... Hurl's going into his 4th season in Halls defense. He shouldn't have to think about it anymore he be assignment perfect. He knows what the expectations are and the things that will be taught later in TC to his competition who haven't even had a week of Halls defense yet. The tangibles will come to the surface later in TC IMO.

I don't see 2 imports being used as kickers in BC. It just doesn't make any sense to me ratio wise. I don't have a problem with giving McCallum a choice of retiring or being cut. Kinda a vet advantage. If McCallum's time has come, cut him behind closed doors like every other player.

Of course it's my opinion, but my opinion isn't based on nothing or simple assumptions. Facts... Hurl lost his starting job in Regina last year. (No one is saying that's the only reason the Riders were losing) We signed Hurl as a FA for starters money. O'Shea has said multiple times, even before he saw Hurl at TC, that 'We' think he's ready to be a starter. O'Shea said last year that Willy was the starting QB before TC which turned out to be true. Allen has a much better pedigree than Hurl. Some of the best CFL'rs are guys with NFL talent but are a little too small or a little too slow to play in the NFL. We don't NEED to start Hurl anymore because we signed Westerman. Opinion.... Given the above, I'd rather have Allen than Hurl because I think that would make us a better team. Assumption.... Given that O'Shea has already penciled Hurl into the starting job, he's likely to start.

I saw Hurl play last year for the Riders and I wasn't impressed. I said as much when we signed him in FA, so no, I don't think he's starter material, but should be an upgrade on special teams and good for rotation when we need him. Them's the facts as I see them.