17to85

You mentioned 9 linebackers (listed) and 1 backup receiver. Explain why this was a roster management no no. Serious question.Cause our offense sucks and we are playing Stoudemire as one of our REC? Like WTF? So not having a better receiving option than Stoudemire is a problem with roster management? Sounds more like a problem with the talent level.

Sinopoli easy. Ottawa is the feel good story of the year and local boy does good is compelling stuff for reporters who often times can't be bothered to actually follow the league.

You can always tell when it's Wild going for a tackle even if you don't see the number just because of this. He flies in at full speed and has the angle right to make the play. He's just a play maker and I am a huge fan of his. He showed last year he can succeed playing in the middle.

We don't have any receivers worth dressing! Kyle Walters needs to get his **** together. If Kyle Walters does take that job at university next year should the Bombers' new GM be forced to stick with O'shea or should he be allowed to pick his own candidate? This potentially limits the number of candidates the Bombers might attract in the off season. A new GM should always have the ability to bring in his own head coach.

We don't have any receivers worth dressing! Kyle Walters needs to get his **** together.

So after watching last nights debacle anyone still want to rush to Nichols defence? Yeah there were more problems than just him but he was pretty crap all on his own.

One thing this team has shown lately is that the defense can and will make good adjustments as the game goes on. Just a god damned shame that the offense can't do jack **** to help them out. 16 points in the first half considering the TOP is remarkable, imagine if the O had done anything and put up a touchdown or something then? This offense is terrible, just all around terrible.

So we finally have the answer, not as good as Tee Martin.

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. pretty good starting qb is much better than a mediocre back up. NIchols is the flavour of the month because he's better than Brohm and Marve but he's not on Kevin Glenns level, he just isn't. Numbers career and otherwise favour Glenn, colour of his jersey favours 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. 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.

Can keep the talent more easily than you think and it's quite possible they would want to move on from some of them by that point anyway.

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.

You are such a ******* drama queen sometimes

You know how I know you didn't watch them last year?? Seriously yes they are 0-4, but I said to my buddy the other night while watching them even when they get hemmed in their own zone this year the differences are night and day. This season it at least looks like they've got a plan they're trying to execute. Last season it was chickens with their heads off in the defensive zone. Not to mention that they've played 2 games against St. Louis which is a team that is one of the worst possible matchups for them in the league. Throw in a Nashville which is another pretty good defensive group and you start to see why they haven't won anything yet. It is very different than last season or the season before where they were losing games 6-1, at least they can compete this year. They have an actual honest to god NHL coach this year and they'll get what he's teaching eventually. No one was expecting an instant turn around and most people expected a rough start to the season just based on a tough schedule.

Give me a break. There are better qbs out there that haven't been signed. Free agents. It's called RECRUITING, Mike.I've heard of recruiting once or twice. I'll try explaining once more. How can you, as a fan, say Davis is worth cutting when you're basically going off absolutely nothing? You say there are better quarterbacks out there. Obviously. But if that's your argument, we may as well just cut everyone because we're not rostering the best anything in the whole world right now.I'm asking you - how can you justifiable say with any confidence that he should (or should not) be cut when you're giving a blind opinion on the topic? We haven't seen him do anything, good or bad. Mike, this is a merry go round with you. Round & round. As usual when you start up with me it always ends this way. You're actually arguing with me over the merits of keeping a fourth string qb?? What I said was my opinion. If I could see this discussion actually going somewhere I'd be more interested in carrying on. I'm done talking to you. Buh bye.It's funny because everyone can see I've actually been trying to get your take on something for like the last 8 posts and you just keep dodging it. You can blame me for a merry-go-round if you want but I'm not the one refusing to answer a simple question.Iso's gonna IsoA different opinion doesn't mean he's wrong. A few posters ganging up on a member doesn't mean that member is wrong either. It's not about a different opinion, it's about refusing to back up his opinion and opting instead to try and pretend like people are attacking him for having an opinion as opposed for asking for that opinion to be clarified and expanded upon. I swear there is a real lack of understanding the difference here.

IF nichols left for greener pastures and IF davis or boyd show fhat they some serious seasoning to do.. Then sure.. Otherwise no. Wait are you implying you'd rather have Nichols than Glenn as the backup qb? Cause Glenn is head and shoulders a better quarterback than Matt Nichols has ever been or will ever be. Really? I sure don't have Nichols pegged as the next Flutie, but Glenn is far from that himself. Not to mention we're talking about 2015 and beyond Kevin Glenn... As opposed to never was Matt Nichols.... I get that Nichols has injected some life here, but being better than Brohm or Marve is a pretty ******* low bar here guys.

Give me a break. There are better qbs out there that haven't been signed. Free agents. It's called RECRUITING, Mike. I've heard of recruiting once or twice. I'll try explaining once more. How can you, as a fan, say Davis is worth cutting when you're basically going off absolutely nothing? You say there are better quarterbacks out there. Obviously. But if that's your argument, we may as well just cut everyone because we're not rostering the best anything in the whole world right now. I'm asking you - how can you justifiable say with any confidence that he should (or should not) be cut when you're giving a blind opinion on the topic? We haven't seen him do anything, good or bad. Mike, this is a merry go round with you. Round & round. As usual when you start up with me it always ends this way. You're actually arguing with me over the merits of keeping a fourth string qb?? What I said was my opinion. If I could see this discussion actually going somewhere I'd be more interested in carrying on. I'm done talking to you. Buh bye. It's funny because everyone can see I've actually been trying to get your take on something for like the last 8 posts and you just keep dodging it. You can blame me for a merry-go-round if you want but I'm not the one refusing to answer a simple question. Iso's gonna Iso

IF nichols left for greener pastures and IF davis or boyd show fhat they some serious seasoning to do.. Then sure.. Otherwise no. Wait are you implying you'd rather have Nichols than Glenn as the backup qb? Cause Glenn is head and shoulders a better quarterback than Matt Nichols has ever been or will ever be.

Unless you have proof that Harper had experience leading another country before he ever became our Prime Minister. Otherwise he had NO EXPERIENCE being a Prime Ministwr. Not to mention that Harper was a similar age as Trudeau is when he first became PM so it's not like he was some old guard politician either. You want an honest opinion? Trudeau is probably more qualified to be a rookie PM than Harper just because of who Trudeaus dad was. The guy has been around politics and politicians his whole life no doubt. In situations like that you have to be pretty ignorant to not pick things up.

This is basically how I feel. I'm somewhat of a fiscal conservative, and I think the current incarnation of the Grits are, too. I'm less concerned with Justin as the face, as I am about who the cabinet ministers will be. Have a good money nerd in charge of the finance portfolio, and I'm totally fine with them in power. Like Dave said earlier, the current LPC is a lot closer to the Con's than people realize, just with a more like-able leader, imo. Harper is just such a complete tool and shoulda been tossed a long time ago. The real difference is that the Liberals have no problems flat out lying about what they really are in a campaign. Oh sure Justin might want to be more left leaning, but the party won't let him go too far. Campaign on the left govern on the right, that's the Liberal way. Tell people what they want to hear and do what needs to be done. It's not a bad system if you're OK with habitual liars running the country.

Well at least we won't have to hear about how it's only Harper that can save Canada from the evils of the world.When our economy doesn't self destruct because Harper isn't personally running it what then? I can hear you pro cons yelling the horror the horror. Oh please, I might be more conservative than anything else but I'm certainly not in the camp that believes the only people who can run things are the Conservatives. My beef with the Liberal party is how they love to piss all over Western Canada in order to pander to Quebec and Ontario. Otherwise I would actually fall in line with their platform pretty well.

What I can't wait to see is how much spinning the anyone but Harper crowd reacts when they realize that the Liberals have been more similar to the Conservatives than anyone else all along. That alone is likely worth the price of admission.

Momentum is strong in politics and the Liberals are going strong with it right now. Appears like they're headed to a majority and I say good. I actually like majority governments, a lot less bullshit and the string of minorities we had really did contribute to how utterly childish the parties have become. I have hated the Conservative campaign from day one. It's made me not want to vote for them honestly and I'm a guy that would self identify as more conservative than anything. I'll likely end up voting for the Conservative candidate because I like him better than the Liberal one but still, the way they've gone about campaigning this year the Conservatives deserve to lose.

but look at the size of those arms, he'd be able to toss people around pretty good.

15 years? No maybe 10 though, I'd have a hard time rating any defence behind the crap that Jim Daley put us through.