17to85

Well in the case of Durant specifically, he's a lot stronger so he's harder to bring down for sure.

dislike.

Like how you told the truth about how Wally was using Joey Elliott? Given that he's brought in Pierce to be experience doesn't that lend some credibility to my thoughts on the matter?

Did anyone else who listened to the coaches show notice that Tim Burke really emphasized that Parenteau can play centre? It makes me wonder if they are considering moving Sorensen out to guard or tackle. No, I don't think Sorensen is losing his job. Parenteau being able to play centre means we don't have to dress Kowalczuk anymore. Pencer can play instead. I don't know if I would call it "losing his job". More like getting moved over to strengthen the right side of the line. Sorensen has tackle experience. Would be interesting to see something like January-Greaves-Parenteau-Kowalczuk-Sorensen, with Pencer as the sixth man. Not saying it's going to happen, but the way Tim Burke was talking it sure sounds like there is going to be a bit of a shuffle going on the OL. Sorenson has bad tackle experience... Hell the only place he's managed to stick in his travels around the league is in Winnipeg at centre. Most likely scenario is Parenteau simply plays guard, Kowalczuk is no longer the 6th ol and Pencer is.

You can be the real deal and be overhyped. He had a lot of success early, but now that teams have clued in you see what the Bombers did, take away the riders run game and make them beat you in other ways. HIs on pace numbers were unsustainable just because no runningback goes through an entire season putting up that kind of yards per game without defenses saying "OK let's focus on stopping that guy"

however Durant did also get sacked 8 times... Perhaps you're guilty of remembering the times Durant was able to get away and for Goltz you're more focussed on the times he was caught.

Conventional wisdom was that MItchell was the guy to take #1.

I think all anyone is saying is that of the options we have available to us Goltz right now is the most multidimensional and provides the most options to the offense and the most for opposing defenses to worry about. For me personally I don't have enough faith in the receivers or the o-line or the gameplan to make enough plays even if Hall is a significantly better passer, at least with Goltz there's the chance he'll take off and get some first downs with his legs.

Goltz, going to assume the bombers can get into scoring range.

I can't think of any trades Mack ever did mid season.... I might have the blinders on here, but I seriously can't remember ANY trade that Mack did.... Jyles to Toronto, trading picks to move up in the draft 2 years ago, there were some others that I can't quite recall right now. Trades aren't commonplace in the CFL though so not sure that means a hell of a lot.

Now you're moving the goal posts a bit... you said he can't read defenses but now it's just that he's a terrible passer... What exactly makes Hall a good passer? What makes him so much better a passer that it negates the huge advantage Goltz brings with his ability to run? We're not talking about the difference between Ricky Ray and Nealon Greene here, we're talking about which qb benefits the Bombers more.

If you'll all remember Muamba was a pain in the ass to get signed intially as well. Guy was always going to be a tough sign, I don't doubt that the Bombers will show him the money, it's just whether or not he wants to stay here or if he thinks there's some other offer out there that is better.

really? You think he's bad at reading defenses? I don't see that, I don't see a lot of bad decisions passing the ball out of him. Maybe it doesn't always work but that has a lot to do with some of the other issues on the team. I can think specifically of a ball that went straight through Edwards hands at a first down marker, I can think of a ball that bounced off Kohlerts chest close to a first down marker... I think his limitations as a passer are somewhat overblown by some people. I think the overall package that Goltz brings is superior to Hall right now simply because opposing teams have to defend more aspects. No matter who goes in the passing game we have won't beat anyone, Goltz legs might open things up enough though to scratch out a win. 2 of 9 at halftime for 12 yards tells me that he can't read defenses. Those drops you speak of were made up later by a couple of circus catches by his receivers in the second half that never should have been completed. that's ridiculous, every other qb gets the benefit of his receivers making unreal catches too why shouldn't Goltz be able to benefit from it as well? Those stats say nothing about how well he can or can't read a defense because there were the two drops I mentioned in there (seems to me that he put the ball where it needed to be there) Hell that one in the endzone to Denmark with a review might have stood as well changing the stats. You are reaching awfully hard to make Goltz sound like a worse passer than he actually is. He may not be the most consistent passer out there, but the entire package is the best that any of the current Bomber qbs have demonstrated.

why do you keep saying this? There was nothing sudden about it. His game has been trending downwards for a number of years now and many people saw it.

really? You think he's bad at reading defenses? I don't see that, I don't see a lot of bad decisions passing the ball out of him. Maybe it doesn't always work but that has a lot to do with some of the other issues on the team. I can think specifically of a ball that went straight through Edwards hands at a first down marker, I can think of a ball that bounced off Kohlerts chest close to a first down marker... I think his limitations as a passer are somewhat overblown by some people. I think the overall package that Goltz brings is superior to Hall right now simply because opposing teams have to defend more aspects. No matter who goes in the passing game we have won't beat anyone, Goltz legs might open things up enough though to scratch out a win.

This is a good move. Woodson wasn't doing much and I assume anything he was doing can be done by Foster now, we get a better pick than we give and an olineman who at worst is a good depth guy just because of the multiple positions he can play. What's not to like?

better a cesspool than people are running around spewing nonsense ideas without anything to back them up. You don't want to be called a fool stop saying foolish things like Suber was a bum in that game.

My thought is, Hall started the 2nd Hamilton game because they wanted to see more, but he got hurt. Has Goltz done anything the past 2 weeks to say he is better than Hall, or deserves more of a look? I don't believe that he has. What potential does Hall have though? I think you can work with Goltz to possibly become a passer, because he can make all the throws, and he's a threat with the read option. Hall is going to have the entire defence sitting on the LOS daring him to make throws, his arm isn't great, and we won't be able to run the ball. I don't think Hall has much potential and he limits the offence. This is why it should be Goltz. His ability to move around adds another dimension to the offense. The rest of the offense is not good enough or consistent enough to have to win it entirely with a quarterbacks arm, at least Goltz gives us the option of making something happen with his legs if we need it.

till the death eh 17? at least we know that if your ever a captain of a ship and she sinks, you would go down with her. You going to argue with anything I've said or just try and poke away at people? Which is more logical? That Arceneaux is a ****** of epic proportions who is taking to twitter to slag an ex team mate over a comment that said nothing more than "Wow." (which is probably what every one of us said when we saw the trade) or that it's more good natured than anything. It's not that I'm defending Elliott to the death, it's that I'm arguing against the over reactions and piling on that goes on here far too often. Pay attention and you might see exactly what sorts of things I will argue. Iunno... calling someone a clown doesn't feel like good natured ribbing to me.... you should hear the things my friends and I call each other, makes clown look like nothing

Why would anyone be surprised? It's been 4 years now where the offense has sucked the big one while the defense did everything in their power to keep games close. Quite honestly I'm surprised it took this long for anything to blow up.

This. All of it. I have no complaints about what Walters has done thus far, however we should still do an exhaustive search for the best available GM in the post season. If it's him, great. Too many times we have taken the convenient way out of these things. Again, I don't think anybody's post, and the originating post says that we should forgo an exhaustive search. The question simply is, what does Walters need to do in one's opinion, to either garner serious consideration, or be hired as the full time G.M. next season after the due diligence of the ball club is completed. And I did say in my post that there's really not much a guy can do taking over midway to convince me one way or the other. GMs really are judged by what they do in the offseason leading into a season. Every GM out there makes some good tweaks when a team is 1-a pile in the standings so just because there's a new receiver making some catches or whatever doesn't really mean a whole lot in the big picture. You want to know if the guy can prove himself with the remainder of this season? I just don't think he can unless he somehow gets us Ricky Ray.

till the death eh 17? at least we know that if your ever a captain of a ship and she sinks, you would go down with her. You going to argue with anything I've said or just try and poke away at people? Which is more logical? That Arceneaux is a ****** of epic proportions who is taking to twitter to slag an ex team mate over a comment that said nothing more than "Wow." (which is probably what every one of us said when we saw the trade) or that it's more good natured than anything. It's not that I'm defending Elliott to the death, it's that I'm arguing against the over reactions and piling on that goes on here far too often. Pay attention and you might see exactly what sorts of things I will argue.

you are very wrong if you think PIerces presence wasn't harmful to the team, I've explained why, but you love you some pierce and it's preventing you from seeing things objectively. What's changed since 2011 for Pierce? Well several injuries, a couple more years on the body. It's really sad to see how far his game has fallen. It's not a case of the OC and the o-line being the big issue, the big problem is that PIerce was outperformed with those same hanidcaps by guys with much much much less experience. If a veteran can't clearly outperform guys getting their first starts then he is a problem.

And that makes you a fool. If you can't see that the dbs played a heck of game in addition to the d-line getting at on of pressure you're hopeless. You see a lot of the times this year when people have been screaming at a lack of pressure it's not really a lack of pressure, it's a lack of coverage giving qbs targets before the rush can get there, not today. The dbs didn't give up much of anything. The only effective play the riders offense had was durant scrambling because the coverage was there, especially by Suber who had a heck of a game that everyone except you seems to have seen. I'm not going to get into name-calling with you just because we disagree, it's too childish. Too bad. I used to enjoy posting here. Disagree all you like but when you say flat out wrong things and then try and back them up damn rights I'm going to call you a fool, if you can't handle that then maybe posting your opinions publicly isn't for you in the first place.

That, of course, makes the assumption that he'll be the 3rd stringer in BC for the rest of the season. The logical conclusion to be drawn from this trade is that he'll be the #2 qb once he's up to speed with the playbook. is that really logical? I'd be very surprised if BC put Pierce ahead of the guy who's been number 2 all year. I'd expect they keep Demarco at #2 unless he struggles. Pierce seems much more like an insurance policy in case of Lulay getting hurt and their young guy being in over his head. If the Lions didn't have belief in Demarco at #2 they wouldn't have started the season with him there.