Atomic

Markett, Ian Wild, and Bryant Turner all had big days. I wouldn't have picked Washington for the DPOTW until he absolutely killed Durant on that last sack.

Ford had a 2.9 yard average in the Banjo Bowl. I liked that we used Volny at the beginning of the game, not sure why we never went back to him.

I don't get it, where's the pun

http://hockey.fantasysports.yahoo.com/ ??

No disagreeing with 17to85 or your posts get deleted... is that in the site rules?

I would have said the same thing too before listening to the coach's show. They're cooking something up.

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.

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.

Most of Mack's trades were to gain or get rid of spare parts, or give us a better draft position. He wasn't going to make a big splash mid-season like Walters has, but he definitely did a good job of getting a good return when he did pull the trigger.

Tim Burke just said on the coaches' show that Swiston is likely to be out this week and probably longer. On Parenteau: "He can play center and guard, so he gives us a chance to move some guys around". Also says Pencer likely will be on the 42 this week.

I think we should give him a chance but that's a bit of a stretch don't you think? I mean, how many times have we actually made it inside the 5...? Twice in the last two games? You don't think teams are going to pick up on the play-action/QB run play fairly soon...? We've been doing it since game one and teams still haven't figured out how to stop it.

I'm not anticipating any ratio changes, especially if Swiston is out for awhile.

Cauchy...

The only reason my initial reaction is negative is because I think Woodson has potential to be a really good Canadian RB, maybe not a full time starter but certainly as a part time guy. Maybe even a Andre Durie type RB-turned-SB. I hate that we never gave him a chance to show what he can do on offence. He comes with big injury concerns which is obviously something this team has seen enough of lately. But we gave up a high-ceiling young Canadian for a veteran ham-and-egger and those are the deals that can come back and bite you if the young guy ends up becoming a big contributor.

Well either way, at least we did something to try and fix the OL. I don't think it will end up panning out as a real improvement, but at least it's a try. Also could mean Swiston's injury is long term.

Or maybe you're "hanging off Elliott's nuts", to use your term

Honestly, Parenteau used to be terrible and I was quite against bringing him in when he was a FA last time, but he really stepped up his game in TO. Immediate improvement at RG for us. He did? So how come he lost his job and hasn't started a game this year?

Hate this trade. Parenteau is brutal.

I don't know that he could ever do enough in half a season to "prove" that he is the guy for the job. As it stands, I like his initiative and we all know he is well-connected around the CIS and CFL. I wouldn't be opposed to keeping him on, but I still would like to see an exhaustive search done. If we can find a guy with successful GM experience or extensive AGM experience, that still might be a safer pick. But is that guy out there, and willing to come here? I guess we'll see.

Act like a child all you want, just don't be surprised when people call you out on it.

I haven't seen anything unclassy about Buck himself, only about his play on the field, which has not been good. If you are in pro sports, then that kind of criticism is valid. No no, nothing unclassy at all. So one post from one poster deserves criticism of the posters "in general". Sometimes you need to look at the source to decide if you need to lend credence and weight to what is posted. Who you allow to post here reflects on you and the entire community here.

Sears is just a little too fragile to be relied upon as a starter, IMO. But if he could stay healthy, wouldn't mind having Markett and Sears on the corners.

I haven't seen anything unclassy about Buck himself, only about his play on the field, which has not been good. If you are in pro sports, then that kind of criticism is valid. No no, nothing unclassy at all.

If Goltz turns out good then we didn't piss it away. All I know is Elliott stopped showing improvement last season and it looks like every GM in the CFL agrees. No point going back to that well.

so 9 starts is enough to judge whether a guy can be a CFL qb? Get real. What's the correct number?That wasn't necessarily what I meant anyway. It was the comparison between Goltz & Elliott that I was referencing. but even using that comparison! 9 games is enough for Elliott to be thrown on the scrap heap? That's not even a full season! I don't think there is a magic number but it's more than 9 ******* games on a team with plenty of other issues. People are too quick to throw people away here. You better be damn sure your guy is a stud if you're going to spend a full season developing him, otherwise you're just pissing away a season for nothing.