GCn20

Cowboy churches? What happens if you are not a cowboy and you know maybe just wanna go pray. Gotta buy chaps with sequins on them? I get that there are cowboys in Alberta and Saskatchewan....that's great. Making it a requirement for entry....that's absurd. It does sound silly even to a Westerner. I am a little surprised by Saskatchewan not embracing Hillbilly church though....mind you, I guess they just call that regular church.

I spent a year in Estevan called July and August in 1990. That town makes Honey Boo-Boo look like Stephen Hawking. I got a buddy who just moved there... Tattoo artist, of all careers.. I have to assume hes pretty much braindead by this point.. You should tell your buddy to really have some fun and mess with them. He can misspell every word on his tattoos on purpose and just sit back and laugh at the fact that nobody notices.

Huff saw a value in Shomari. Some people here dont. He also saw first-round value in Ameet Pall. Huff is far from infallible. Personally I'd have liked to see Shomari on teams to start with and work his way into the rotation like anyone else. Oh well. It all boils down to price tag. For the right price, Williams could have been a valuable contributor and depth for our club.

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies. They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be. Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman. Ooops. Sorry. More logic. Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product. Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon. Nope, not at all what I was saying. Not in any way shape or form. My point is simply that requiring the exclusive use of union shops limits the amount of companies that can tender and therefore waters down the pool of skilled labor. On a project with the scope and size of a stadium that will inevitably lead to cost overrun due to limited tendering, and will exclude in some cases some very good and possibly better qualified companies. Can you seriously defend the need to use only union labor? What possible argument could one have that it would improve a project. It was simply a requirement put in place by a government that is beholden to the unions. It made so sense, other than political gain, then and the proof is coming out in the pudding.

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies. They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be. Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman. Ooops. Sorry. More logic. Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product. Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon. Nope, not at all what I was saying. Not in any way shape or form. My point is simply that requiring the exclusive use of union shops limits the amount of companies that can tender and therefore waters down the pool of skilled labor. On a project with the scope and size of a stadium that will inevitably lead to cost overrun due to limited tendering, and will exclude in some cases some very good and possibly better qualified companies. Can you seriously defend the need to use only union labor? What possible argument could one have that it would improve a project.

Poor Alberta. Those Tories really screwed them up. LOL. Consider your audience when you want to go on a rant about poor Alberta. We would give our left nut in Manitoba to have the economy that has been crafted in Alberta under the Tories.

I agree. Anytime only union shops can be utilized the more danger there is for cost overrun and poor workmanship through decreased competition and lack of option.

The timeframe was aggressive. It had nothing to do with design flaws. It may have contributed to some of the shoddy workmanship though.

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies. They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be. Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman. Ooops. Sorry. More logic. Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product.

I found it hilarious today that a few Riderfans were crying about the Stamps ability to sign BLM to a contract. Whining about the SMS....what an about face they pull when a team not named the Riders appears to be pushing the SMS limits.

I think Taj Smith might know the answer to that.

Absolutely, he didn't cost us a draft pick. Nothing to lose.

Absolutely. I was one who You think they keep all of them around? Unless Grigsby got some balls surgically added in the offseason he's not as good as the other two guys. Call me over sensitive but really beginning to think you don't like Grigsby. He gave us high hopes coming outta camp after.cottons injury... Then we realized he can't block, barely catch and is a lightweight when any contact happens... Any dislike is based upon his brutal season with us AND then blaming everyone but himself.. That's just incorrect... catching is one of the things he is good at... I believe there was even discussion around here about how effective is would be in the slot... Absolutely, I was one of a few members here who mused that perhaps we could convert him to receiver.

Griffiths is likely a long term project for the PR or just a body who will give us some bodies at OL in mini-camp. He is an extreme longshot, but hey, he's got a better shot at making the CFL than he did yesterday. Hope he works hard and surprises. Any of these fringe signing right now leave me a little skeptical with mini-camp nearing. Teams always struggle to have enough new recruits at each position for mini-camp and begin signing longshots to fill out the camp.

I get why Huffer may have drafted him. What I don't get is how this guy was able to have so many CFL lives.

You and Aards are really carrying around a bad case of the jinx today. At BB.com, Aards told us we should watch out for Pall now that he has real coaching...CUT. Now you with Jackson. On behalf of all current Bombers under contract, I will please ask you not to mention any more names today, lol

Shocker. Pall looked like he was on the cusp of CFL superstardom.

Exactly, he offered ridiculously high contracts to guys like Casey Printers that completely changed the pay scale at QB. He did this with several positions. If the average going rate for a star receiver is 100k he will offer 200k and get his guy, well guess what every other comparable talent wants now. He has no regard for the salary structure of the CFL. He spends like a drunken sailor.

You really think Walters had no say in ranking the players. SMH Or that he wasn't a big part of the scouting of them and overall evaluation. Mack may have overruled Walters on a few picks, in fact there is likely little doubt that he did, but the guys he over ruled them for were people that Walters felt strongly enough about their potential to rank them as possibilities for their respective draft picks. That shows equally bad talent recognition imo. I am positive that picks like Pencer, and Etienne were taken highly based partly on glowing scouting reports. Those glowing scouting reports would have come from Walters. He did most of the NI talent evaluation. I am certain that if Walters initial scouting of Penser, Etienne, etc. had stated that they weren't top prospects that Mack would not likely have even considered them. Walters floated these names as potential 1st round picks along with probably a few other names and Mack did not do a good job of narrowing the list down. These are not names that should have been on that list. That's on Walters. Picking them is on Mack. Both wear the stink.

Grigsby is, at best, a guy who will have a few offensive plays and will see only limited playing time.

All you gotta do is look at what he's doing now that he's outta football. Nothing that requires any serious effort or work ethic. What does he do now?

Despite our media being highly critical at times....I will take it any day over the tripe that Pederson tries to peddle. He is by far the biggest homer in sport journalism and it taints him because of stupid crap like Kevin Glenn=FA winners.

It appears we will recruit our new LBs. Hope they are gooders.

Lots of ways good players end up getting run out of town. Coaches and GMs looking for someone to blame, or to appease an angry fan base are just a couple that immediately spring to mind. Look at the defensive stats and win/loss record for Saskatchewan while Hurl was MLB. Pretty impressive, if you ask me. However, blaming and then ditching a MLB is much easier than placing the blame on an underperforming big money offence and QB.

I don't think that's true. I think he worked hard. The big obstacle for Jade was his strength and lack of experience at the position. He just could not put weight on his frame and wasn't savvy enough of a receiver to make up for that lack of weight.