TBURGESS

3rd in the west is the same as 3rd in the league, not bottom half or bottom third. How is it negative to respond to folks who are making stuff up?

Not as off as your accusations of what I said in the off season. FTR: I picked the Bombers to be 2nd or 3rd in the league, not in the bottom 3rd. I didn't say or imply that the sky was falling. If you 'heard' anything else, then it was the voices in your head. Losing 3 all stars, 2 on the O line is a fact and I already gave full props to the positrons the morning after the win for this game.

It's funny seeing the same guys who take shots at the Riders their fandom doing the IToldYaSo's after week one.

I was surprised that Hecht didn't get a taunting penalty there. I expect that Carter's been told not to react overtly to any slight because the refs are watching him.

I think it's the new reality of taking a GM or even an HC job in the CFL. You won't get to pick your staff until the old staffs contracts are up. No team can afford to pay 2 HC's and stay under the management SMS.

That's the only thing that makes sense, but their are no past performances in week 1, so it's all on off season expectations.

That depends on how long Khari's contract is for with the new rules. Gotta pay him anyway and it's on the coaching SMS.

I agree with the Winnipeg choice and the bottom 3 but the rest are confusing to say the least. Nothing but this season to go on, how do you rank Ottawa at 6 and Calgary at 2 or the Ticats behind the Lions?

I'll go with Gable.

As one of 'those people', I call BS. Both QB's played well. Nichols performance didn't win us the game and Reilly's performance didn't lose them the game.

I know that the CFLPA will try to get whatever penalty the league gives Simoni reduced. It's what they always do but, Collaros is part of the CFLPA too. They should be protecting him as much as they protect Lawrence.

Fixed it for you. 😎

So your saying if Burham makes it to the endzone instead of being caught from behind, then Reilly's a better QB because he has the same number of TD's as Int's, even tho he didn't do anything differently? I'd call the first Burnham big catch a busted coverage because 2 of our guys went with the same player. His 2nd big one was poor tackling, not a bust. Fenner just got beat in the end zone one on one. I don't know where you get the 'inaccurate in the intermediate passing game' or the 'decade of taking a beating' meaning that he doesn't want to run. I didn't see many lane for him to run through and I didn't see him miss (m)any intermediate routes. I'm not propping up his performance, nor does the name on his back mean anything to me. Its not just about the stats. Lets say Reilly does nothing different but.... Burnham makes it to the endzone instead of being caught. Reilly has 11 more yards and a TD. Burnham catches the ball that he dropped in the 4th. Reilly's stats go to 360ish yards, 2 TD's 2 Int's and 59% without making a single change to anything he did. For fun... lets say that BC can actually kick a convert so they get 3 more points (1 for the convert -2 for our run back to the end zone). The last couple of minutes completely change as they are only down by 3. Would any of this change the game that Reilly had? Nope. If he won, would those be good stats? Yup.

Their defence gave up 3 TD's on busted coverages. If they don't do that, Reilly isn't throwing deep as often. The second int was with 4:26 left when they were behind by 10. Gotta throw deep on that one and take your chances. Reilly doesn't call his own plays. They didn't or couldn't run. That's not on Reilly. It's on their OC and our DL. Wins and losses change how we look at QB stats. Nichols takes advantage of 3 BC busts in the end zone, relies on Harris to do most of the work, throws for under 200 yards and everyone around here says he played great cuz we won. Reilly throws for 320+ yards, 1 TD but doesn't get any busts in the end zone to take advantage of and loses. Folks blame him for losing cuz he threw 2 ints. If Reilly played for the Bombers we'd still have won. If Nichols had played for the Lions, they still would have lost. The key IMO was the 3 busts in the end zone.

I agree with the 'growing pains', but our DL absolutely stuffed the run. Not sure if running for 2 or 3, then facing a blitz would have helped Reilly at all last night. He had poor defences in Edmonton too. Folks love to give QB's too much credit for the wins and too much blame them for the losses.

It's not that Reilly is obsessing on the deep ball. It's that he was playing from behind and didn't have any running game to go to. Put Andrew Harris on BC last night and Reilly looks like a world beater.

I disagree. BC had to to to max protect and Reilly was still being hit as he threw. Reilly made the throws, even under duress, his receivers let him down several times last night. BC lost in a big part because our front 4 took the run away. Once you make a team one dimensional, you're likely to win.

Reilly is struggling to win games because his defence has been letting him down and his OL isn't protecting him. Same as last year.

Bad week for newbie HC's. Only one, Steinauer, managed to get a win. Claybrooks, Dickenson, and Jones all lost. Ottawa beating Calgary was the surprise of the week. BLM missing a wide open receiver late in the 4th almost never happens. Neither does throwing 4 picks and winning. Maybe Ottawa won't be as bad as I expected. Maybe the Stamps finally drop in the standings like folks have been predicting for years. Our young OL played well. 2017 Nichols showed up. Our front 7 owned BC's OL. Everything the positrons have been saying all off season came true, except they said that Hecht sucked. BC needs to fix the busts in their defensive backfield and have to find a running game before they become good. Think mid-season. It's nice to be tied for first, while Calgary, BC, and Sask are tied for last. Based on this week, Ottawa and Montreal look better than I thought they would and Calgary looks worse.

Harris - Owned the BC's D Hecht - Not the 'Hurl Award' winner Nichols - 2017 form and he hit the deep balls Happy Honker - The D line for absolutely stopping BC's running game.

17's argument isn't that some CFLrs are as good as fringe NFLrs. His argument is: "The CFL is filled with guys who have enough talent to play in the NFL" and "the bottoms of rosters in terms of skill are very comparable". If the majority of CFLrs were as good as the majority of at least the bottom NFLrs, then it stands to reason that our stars would easily make teams when they went down to the NFL and that's simply not true. Most aren't even good enough to become backups. The Armstrong story isn't just about a CFL player who wes good enough to make an NFL team. It's also about a player who was no longer good enough for the NFL coming back to the CFL so he could continue to play. If he was good enough to stay in the NFL, he would have stayed there. For every Armstrong, who makes it in the NFL, even for a short time, there are a bunch of CFL stars who don't make one of their teams. Most CFL stars who go down to the NFL never become even brief starters, backups, backups to backups or practice roster players. If the majority of CFL and NFL players were on the same level, those types of players who choose to continue their careers in the CFL wouldn't be highly thought of or sought after. Just having an NFL TC under your belt or a year on an NFL PR is enough to make fans salivate. Anyway, there's no need to continue this argument. We've all made our points and no one is changing anyone elses mind. Just about game time, so I'm outta here.

He's a very good receiver. Gotta think he'll be even better with Reilly chucking him the ball this year.

I doubt the Stamps expect him to play a full season this year either. IMO, they're expecting Greenwood to hold down the fort until Singleton comes back from the NFL.

You're talking about guys who were fringe players in the NFL. They want to believe it.

No it doesn't, but it does say that the best of them end up in the NFL.