Mr Dee

It must be more than that as he's not the first import kicker they've looked at. I believe they're strongly looking at all parts of the ST system and want to improve that aspect of it to be independent and stand on its own. Field position, earned points and directional punting. We all know ST is important to O'Shea and sure he wants that aspect to be the best it can be…not just operational. Hopefully all bundled in one player, but they're certainly taking more than one approach to this.

I would prefer some meaningful slap. The idea of moving down the draft makes sense. The drop for each 10K sounds right. But it would have to be in the 1st round. There seemed to be a conscious effort, with deferred payments, to keep the overage as low as possible. There should be more of a fitting punishment. Something like how we're punished when we have to listen to their blathering. Or it that too harsh?

I read an article that suggested that may be a possibility. But I just can't see them passing on Lavertu. He is just a perfect fit, with their OL needs and the fact that Ottawa is going to want French players on their team. Drafting a Franco first overall will be great for relations with the French fans. I have to agree that Lavertu would be a no-brainer fit for Ottawa, so does that mean it's Desjardins pick? I would love to have Lavertu on our roster, but I'm starting to see the benefit of choosing Smith.

Proposed new salary cap…$4,417,975

What I'm saying is relax…we haven't had any long runs or long passes against us yet and you're just too ready to crucify the guy. How did Brown put it? "In fact, maybe coining this as "mildly disturbing" is simply an old-school mentality getting the best of me. As long as it works, I'm sure Bomber fans and players won't care if he scrolls out his weekly blitz packages in disappearing ink." Brown's having fun with it and until something different happens, maybe we can take it lightly for now too.

When others read the article, they will not come to the same conclusion…the only one using the word paranoid is you. View the full article

In Doug Brown's article today in the Free Press, he describes the deal breaker possibilities in the CFL-CFLPA as: "one where they can "tie a salary cap to a percentage of revenue like every other major professional sport in North America." Further: Revenue sharing is something the players gave up in the last CBA, when the league insisted it was in the poor house. Now all the league has to do to avoid an escalating labour dispute is reinstate it and negotiate a fair percentage with the players. It seems simple and easy enough, but it appears the CFLPA is preparing for the worst, as this last mass communication with the membership ended with a request for permanent addresses so that they may "... if necessary, conduct a vote to strike by way of secret ballot." The league may be waiting for the players to blink in this staring contest, but it appears this is one issue they will not concede. ​What the CFL faces is totally unlike anything the other sports leagues face and cannot be so easily slotted in past league vs player negotiations. This is truly a Canadian conundrum. Private and Public and import and non-import. The issue is complex but the solution has to be simple or they'll have no league to worry about. Feed the player's wallets, and track the owner's spendings, is that so very hard to do? View the full article

C'mon, you're acting like he's the worst Noel.

I'm looking for a madhouse-wild-D chasing, and making plays all over the field to start the year and keep us in games. I'm thinking we'll be somewhat competitive on Offence, even to start, and get better with more snaps. We'll need, and get, great ST play to give us the field position to keep us close. Punting plays a big part of this. And kicking has to come up bigger than it has in the past. Field position from kickoffs last year wasn't very good. Kicking also has to get us the points that will make a difference in a lot of games. 6 to 8 wins is not unreasonable and like many posters have pointed out, teams may be closer to each other due to their own player losses. Only 40 days 'til training camp when we can re-visit this again.

"Last week in Calgary, the CFL and the CFLPA met to begin discussions on a new CBA. Both sides are being careful not to leak any information as to how the meetings went. It's safe to say that both sides believe that the players should be making more money, but how they get there and how much more money is going to make these negotiations challenging for both sides." "For example, the players making more money isn't as simple as the owners writing a bigger check, and allowing the teams GMs to spend that money where they please…... "The term revenue sharing has come up and apparently is going to be an issue that is on top of the agenda…….. "All of which makes all of these negotiations clear as mud, but the bottom line is both sides know the players should get paid more, and it is safe to say, that in the end, that will happen" - Glen Suitor, TSN April 16 http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/glen_suitor/?id=449538

Last I heard, both sides are trying to keep their talks quiet..and that's probably a good thing. There is time to get this settled and as long as there is nothing outlandish, it will get done. And, let's keep the politics of it out of the equation, OK?

I don't know how long one should wait for a good Goosen.

….iso…."This could be a real disaster in the making." …….Shows how little you know, I dropped that particular page from my playbook. ….iso.… "he just seems oblivious to everything". ……Yeah, I saw that movie, do you really think i look like Tom Cruise? ….iso…."The fact he can't stay anywhere more than 2 seasons tells me that there are a lot of red flags with Etcheverry. He either loses his players, they stop playing for him or he has communications issues with them." … I'm not going anywhere….but the gate is over there, right past those little red flags, you can leave at any time. How's that for communicating? ……iso……….An old jaded coach who seems paranoid about players leaking information about his defense. ……..Wait a minute, I have an answer for that one

I'm going to try and enjoy this new type of D and relish the idea of the opposition being confused by what we present. Structure? I wouldn't compare it to a basic 4-3 type of D, but I'm sure there is a structure and the variables work off of that structure….being responsible for your job under that umbrella. One of the keys will be to acquire multiple players (there's that word multiple again) who are versatile and quick and talented. Let's face it, if a defence doesn't have the talented players needed or the coaching necessary, you'll get the results we got last year. There was structure in that defensive concept but can we say that players didn't struggle under it? Or that the playbook used helped the players understand any better? Or that the players knew what their teammates were doing? The players, who are players, will adjust to this, and may even flourish and I think that's exactly why we're scouring the country to fit the mould of the players we want to use. I can't wait to see what they've come up with.

We all get excited when we hear good things about a QB we have in our camp. A QB who can throw a bus, instead of being thrown under one. It's better than what we usually hear…"his arm is suspect." R. Marve's 1st goal will be to supplant B. Brohm on the depth chart, then M. Hall. He's got a ways to go. Strong-arming your way into position only works in the arm-wrestling, the mafia or politics.

Jacquie was just pointing out the schoolyard tactics of some posters who think it's OK to point out and mock people's disabilities. It has nothing to do with politicians or morticians or beauticians. That wasn't the point. And really, who cares about comedians and impressionists who have to stoop to that level for comedy? Comedy…really? It's still a form of bullying and a means to elevate one's own position over the unfortunate circumstances of others. Am I taking this too seriously? Maybe, but I, for one, agree with her.

By normal, do you mean me?...

Except that it really wasn't. Burke was pretty hands off which was a problem many people had. The games where he did take a more active role the defense responded but instead he focussed on being just the head coach... not sure exactly what he did when he did that, but that's the official line. Except what? That it wasn't a disaster or that it wasn't overseen by Burke? I don't know about you, but if I was a Head Coach, and had a reputation as a defensive specialist, I would be heavily involved in fixing or helping fix the problem. The fact that he didn't doesn't make it less of a disaster. My point is last year's defence was a disaster, but nobody should declare this year's D or new DC anything yet.

They won't move a key piece like Trouba…he's gold. His play has guaranteed that. He's entrenched. Might as well change his his 1st name to Manny.

The ones who are throwing around the word disaster are forgetting about last year's defence…now that was a disaster, …and was overseen by a supposed defensive guru, Tim Burke.

I don't mind the idea and the concept behind the idea about organized chaos, in shifting players around to heighten their effectiveness. It is definitely thinking outside the box and can lead to thrilling rewards. It's intriguing to think you can run a defence that will be difficult to read from the offensive point of view. Then there's the other side, where it there is going to have to be an understanding by the players in their roles inside this new scheme. I'm sure the players will initially embrace this system if it lets them make plays. But there's going to be a lot of questions to be asked and hopefully our new DC can provide the answers. But the staff have confidence in each other and that's never a bad thing. I think back to last year and our defensive staff and although I wanted to believe in them, I had a bad-in-the-back-of-my-mind feeling about them and that was with a guy like Burke supposedly over-seeing them. Sounds like we're getting athletic players and leaders to lean on for this D, so buckle up the chin straps, 'cause it looks like we're in for a ride.

But class and sensitivity don't come from a handbook.

My only opinion is that Friesen handled it wrong. I don't know if Miller handled it wrong according to what he was instructed to say or do. You've convicted him already. That doesn't mean to say this whole thing could have been handled differently, I just don't know all the facts. You say " It annoys me when the Bombers get bad press that they could have avoided and this is one of those times." You're attaching all the blame on the Bombers when they are only part of that BBB group and you just do not know who decided what in regards to this matter.

You can't play schoolyard-flip-the-phrase on me on this one because I have not stated how Miller handled it one way or the other. Where my opinion does comes in is related to how Friesen handled, then wrote his article. Pretty evident to me he didn't get his way and so he took it out on Miller. Your You're the one in denial.

………What leak?