17to85

Agreed. After the Willy interview I switched over to 1290. They take some calls but not nearly as much. Walby provides good insight as well. even bob is getting angry with the callers.

We had that great Khari team in 2001 (?) but we have not had a dominating team since the late 1980's ... just a good year here and there ... we are on the way to building a dynasty the 01 team was dominant, the 02 team might have been better but ran into injuries in playoffs and a rookie Ricky Ray taking the league by storm. 03 they were a good team as well, hosted a playoff game. I think that counts as a good stretch of seasons, they just panicked too soon and canned the coach.

god CJOB has to stop with taking callers, no one worthwhile phoning in, what a waste of time.

yeah it's already too quiet in there

well that's just cause they're the two NHLers at this point. Prospects are iffy, but yeah when you draft well you can just assume there's guys developing who will eventually be contributing.

And they're well on their way assuming guys keep progressing. I don't know if Scheifele has the real high end #1C potential but he'll be a solid top 6 C I think and Trouba could be your #1D for a long time so once you have those two pieces the rest just comes naturally.

That's a big negative. We (Riders) strongly need BC to lose. Otherwise, we'll stay in the basement. No the point is that his "in-laws" will be cheering for BC just because that's the kind of people they are.

Situational awareness. You either throw the ball right away or you throw it away right away. Doesn't matter if he seems the guys coming or not he held onto the ball too long for the situation he was in.

It's not though and here's why - As a play caller in that situation you're giving your QB a chance to make a play while trusting him not to make a poor decision. As a play caller you go into shotgun on second and inches with the thought that the WORST thing that's going to happen is you're going to be facing third and inches on the next play. If there's a play to be made on second down, make the throw. If not (which clearly there wasn't) you throw the ball away and take your sneak on third down and start over again. You do not under any circumstances take the sack, which was the result of Reilly hanging onto the ball to long. The play call was fine. The protection was good from the line. It was a very simple, basic football decision that Mike Reilly got wrong. Hence why it's a bad call. Reilly has been struggling all year - even last week he didn't get 200 yards passing. Eskies Defense has been winning everything. At that point you get the first down, going into shotgun formation on 2nd and inches isn't fooling anyone. Not me, not the 80 year old guy sitting in front of me, and certainly not Hufnagel and the Calgary Stampeder Defense. Totally unnecessary risk (though I agree 100% he should have just chucked the ball out of bounds if the play wasn't there). no it's not a bad call, it's bad execution by the qb. He takes the snap, he drops back he throws the ball. Either to his receiver who got open or if his receiver didn't get open out of bounds. More teams should be gambling like that on 2nd and inches. It's not about fooling anyone, it's about essentially having a free play as long as you don't do anything stupid. Either someone makes a play or you pitch the ball away and get your inches on 3rd down. Where is the advantage? As has been said you're not fooling anyone! You go for the inches and you have a first down and start all over again. The game is all about getting first downs not getting sacked when you don't have to. He might get sacked on the next play for the reasons you state, but then it will be second down, not third from further back. But if you avoid stupidity you get your first down on 3rd down anyway. What you are doing is you are hoping someone on the defence makes a mistake and you can exploit that for a big gain. If no one is making a mistake you just throw the ball away and take your first down on 3rd and inches. The only thing you don't do is turn the ball over or take a sack. That's all on the qb to do.

His drafting has been really good, that will do more to ensure the long term success of the team than anything else. Just gotta be patient. They said that from the get go, they weren't going to be big players in FA, they were going to build from within, well that takes like 5 years to really pay off.

It's not though and here's why - As a play caller in that situation you're giving your QB a chance to make a play while trusting him not to make a poor decision. As a play caller you go into shotgun on second and inches with the thought that the WORST thing that's going to happen is you're going to be facing third and inches on the next play. If there's a play to be made on second down, make the throw. If not (which clearly there wasn't) you throw the ball away and take your sneak on third down and start over again. You do not under any circumstances take the sack, which was the result of Reilly hanging onto the ball to long. The play call was fine. The protection was good from the line. It was a very simple, basic football decision that Mike Reilly got wrong. Hence why it's a bad call. Reilly has been struggling all year - even last week he didn't get 200 yards passing. Eskies Defense has been winning everything. At that point you get the first down, going into shotgun formation on 2nd and inches isn't fooling anyone. Not me, not the 80 year old guy sitting in front of me, and certainly not Hufnagel and the Calgary Stampeder Defense. Totally unnecessary risk (though I agree 100% he should have just chucked the ball out of bounds if the play wasn't there). no it's not a bad call, it's bad execution by the qb. He takes the snap, he drops back he throws the ball. Either to his receiver who got open or if his receiver didn't get open out of bounds. More teams should be gambling like that on 2nd and inches. It's not about fooling anyone, it's about essentially having a free play as long as you don't do anything stupid. Either someone makes a play or you pitch the ball away and get your inches on 3rd down.

So one of the biggest media personalities and journalists in thw city is allowed to pen an article with ideas as dumb as seen on a fan forum without ridicule? Come on man, this guy is supposed to be a professional.. And to suggest his idiot ideas are ok because they are on par with stupid ideas on here is quite possibly the worst argument you have ever put forth.. It's actually a pretty good comparison... Lawless is just like a forum poster, except he gets to put his crap in the actual media. He's bi-polar depending on whether the team is coming off a win or a loss, he touts his own ludicrous ideas as the only sensible solution for the teams woes... He never acknowledges being wrong on anything... What's his username I wonder...

Logic says routing teams two weeks in a row is not in BC's favour. They had last week. This game will be closer than you think. Some people are just needlessly negative. If only this team was as good as Edmonton... siiiggghhhh the esks are sooooo dreamy.....

Which makes sense, Suber got hurt and the guy who took his spot is doing fine and they can't get Suber onto the roster if people are healthy. Trade from an area of depth.

everyone is entitled to be wrong.

The call there is fine, the problem on that play was the QB. There are 2 things you can't do in that situation, take a sack or turn the ball over. The instant he realized it was going to take too long to get the play off he should have put the ball into the 2nd row. That's alllllll on Reilly.

even if there's an 80% chance of it working it's still stupid. the 20% chance of it not working is too much risk when you D is playing as well as it was.

He wants to write shitty articles he should get bashed for it same as I'd bash someone writing stupid **** on this forum.

Oh ye of little faith... I believe in the blue!

If trading americans for canadians was so easy everyone would do it. This whole idea that at 3-1 the Bombers need to blow it up is ridiculous as well. Even if they do get smoked tonight they're still 3-2 and are still far from being a write off on the season. It's the CFL, **** changes week to week never mind season to season.

He's a good coach no question, but that call there was stupid. Your D is doing a great job stopping the Calgary offense why even take the risk of giving them the ball in the scoring zone? I'd have shown some faith in the unit that has been your best on the year AINEC and punted and made Calgary earn any points they get.

yep was good to see the arrogance cost him the game. Couldn't have happened to a nicer *******.

Want Calgary to beat the ever loving piss out of Edmotnon That shameless showboating at the end of the bomber game means thatn 50-0 is too good for them.

Yeah people shouldn't take this as everyone shitting on Grigsby, I got nothing against the guy, but I think Cotton was and is a better runner and I want to see him get a chance. Our running game isn't working well enough that it's untouchable.

Pretty strange post for a guy who usually calls out other posters for selective stats... Willy Week 1 - 308 yds (70%) Week 2 - 307 yds (64%) Week 3 - 256 yds (63%) Week 4 - 180 yds (52%) Look! He's trending downwards too... we should try Brohm. I would be willing to make the case that Willy is seeing his numbers regress because the running game has regressed....