Noeller

Hard to really avoid putting the title on anyone not on the o-line. Removing Bucknor would have a lesser impact in the game than removing Picard or Neufeld. But that's as I said before a function of an attention grabbing spot vs. a spot that you can traditionally hide a weaker player in. Doesn't mean the guy in the hidden spot is better, just that it's less obvious on a play to play basis. I also believe it's a function of the OL struggling as a group where as the secondary outside of Bucknor is pretty ******* good. "Traditionally" maybe you do hide a weaker player at Bucknor's position, but does that put him in the weakest player category by default? I'll concede that Picard is in a more obvious, and more scrutinized position, but his gaffes have been more costly to the team than anything that Bucknor has done. Really? Cause Bucknor getting picked on has lead to a bunch of TD and 2 point converts being given up. The guy was **** last year too but he made a lot of tackles so people mistakenly thought that was good. No it just means teams were picking on him. You don't know enough to know if that's true or not.....not that that ever stops you

Canada, as a nation, is close to the middle. We're not an extreme country. The LPC is the closest thing we have to a moderate party in this country right now.

Hard to really avoid putting the title on anyone not on the o-line. Removing Bucknor would have a lesser impact in the game than removing Picard or Neufeld. But that's as I said before a function of an attention grabbing spot vs. a spot that you can traditionally hide a weaker player in. Doesn't mean the guy in the hidden spot is better, just that it's less obvious on a play to play basis. I also believe it's a function of the OL struggling as a group where as the secondary outside of Bucknor is pretty ******* good. "Traditionally" maybe you do hide a weaker player at Bucknor's position, but does that put him in the weakest player category by default? I'll concede that Picard is in a more obvious, and more scrutinized position, but his gaffes have been more costly to the team than anything that Bucknor has done. Again, I come back to "If Bucknor is one of our worst players, then this team is pretty good!" .....Bucknor is just fine, and last year (at times) we raved about his work.

In fairness to the Als (and trust me, I know how good Bowman is...) isn't Bowman getting old now?

Leggett and Randle are the same size. If Field was so easy, no one would be complaining about Bucknor. Giguere plays boundary... so technically I'm 'wasting' Randle on the Tori Gurleys and Joe Wests of the league. In fairness only really ignorant people are complaining about Bucknor...

Hey, I agreed with you.....Bucknor is one of the worst on the team.....he's one of the worst 40-or-so starters on the team......

I'm a pretty big JFG fan, but when Dave first brought up this ridiculous idea on FB, my response was "JFG"...

I say this and I truly do like Bucknor but.. It's pretty close. Especially if you're looking for weak links on the defensive side of the ball. He doesn't draw the ire of fans like the OL or Hurl do because they are much more front and centre and Bucknor is tucked away on the corner to hide him, but he's the guy teams always pick on after a turnover. I could live with him if we were using the ratio flexibility to bolster other positions, but we're not. He does get picked on but in his defense he holds his ground. He's extremely athletic and is a good tackler. Only problem is he still gets burned too much. But the issue with that is you don't really know if he's getting burned, or if someone else is, and he's covering for them......without knowing the schemes and all that, you just don't really know who's at fault....

neither Janvier or Morley will be anywhere near game shape....

Well, assuming our guys are healthy, bigger, stronger, faster and younger, I see no problems with our starting lineup. Which is a really good point, too. I said to Dave "If Bucknor's our worst starter, then we have a really good ******* team"

Ken King has stated that it's this plan or nothing. There is no Plan B......

Coming along nicely...made great progress the last couple weeks, especially.

And, again, news that was old yesterday....

All I know is, it's not Bucknor...not even close....

as Irving just tweeted: "He's just here to be evaluated, not to be a saviour..."

....still a firm believer that the Leafs are English-Canada's team, and Habs are French-Canada's team.......period.

Ack...beat me to it. Feel free to delete mine, Rich!

fyp.......

God I hope that Sask diss is true....

One of the reasons I've always been a big MOS guy, too... #LunchBucket4Life

None... we start Corey Lewis and start to look at NFL cuts... ^^this

We are starting 8 Cdn, we only have to start 7. Just move back Hurl as backup. Can the Bombers re-structure his contract? As has been mentioned a lot lately, Hurl has been playing well...getting better every week. I really don't think they're going to move him from that spot. Simmons likely plays ST for now.Maybe rotates in to some D spots...

Very interesting...never say no to talented players that want to be here, and have a chip on their shoulder.

They're definitely trying to promote C-Train use with this proposal, and I'm totally cool with that. I love taking the train to the 'Dome or McMahon, 'cause parking is obscenely priced everywhere, and the train is quick and direct. Coming from the north, we usually park at the zoo, and then take the train wherever.

Jake Thomas is this year who he's always been....a very good DL who is massively underrated by this board. He goes about his job in an unspectacular fashion, getting **** done. He's never going to be an elite superstar, but he's never gonna **** up that badly. I'd take a whole batch of guys like that on any of my teams.