BomberfanMKS

Woli I could see being a meniscus strain/minor tear based on hyperflexion from the video. Given how he looked on the sidelines I'd hope it's more on the strain side than tear side which could have him in with a brace on for this game.

One of the problems is that just over 0.05 isn't intoxicated and for the vast majority barely increases the likelyhood of causing an accident. Unfortunately accident likelyhood goes up exponentially so you need to set the legal limit well below the point where you've substantially increased someone's likelyhood of causing an accident. That results in a lot of people driving just over the limit, but much fewer people driving with a dangerous level of intoxication.

Why didn't Edmonton take more points at the end of the game there??!! This is an in-division game against an opponent they play twice.... With a gimme field goal to win by 8 instead of 5....

Unfortunately from a stats perspective Adams is almost going to be worse than TE by default because of how good a blocking receiver he is. He's such an asset in that respect that Plop had him drawn in as a blocker on a TON of plays... The blocking receiver is never going to get the reception so a far more significant part of the offensive set includes plays where Darvin will never catch the ball then for Edwards who was more likely to be drawn up as the ball catcher than as the receiver blocker. It'd be cool to see some plays for Darvin where he sets up as a blocker and then does a quick release into the middle off a pump fake - I could see defenses biting and him slipping past coverage completely.

They've got injuries in the linebacking core right now... just added another linebacker to the practice squad. I'm going to guess it's a roster management thing - They need another linebacker getting familiar with our system incase someone else gets hurt and we don't need more receivers. The only other receivers on the practice squad right now are both Nationals. We currently have 7 American WR's on the roster

Their run defense and LB play was real legit. That game would have been REALLY close if they had more discipline.

Yeh Whitehead looked like he had the potential to be a star in Winnipeg - Even on the bench the guy showed himself to be an excellent teammate being happy for the success of the team and his teammates (cheering from the bench)... IMO he's also showing that he worked on his route running since our Grey Cup run... he's doing little things to get separation that aren't just about speed that he didn't do in 2019.

Yeh the pick-6 INT was a bad throw that got turned into a game-losing play by a rookie receiver doing the wrong thing. His other INT was another poor throw that ALSO should have probably been an incomplete pass if (the same) rookie receiver had tried to make a play on the ball in the air. Harris' fault for making bad throws - rookie receivers fault for not defending against the INT on the first one and turning the second one into a game losing pick-6

Yeh the guy who got beat for the TD was maybe a step away from having an interception... He had position on the pass, just jumped a tiny bit too early and couldn't secure the int.

Pretty fair assessment overall - everyone who had Winnipeg low was basically saying the same thing - They weren't sure about Collaros for a whole season and weren't sure about a 34 year old Andrew Harris... Given how much the team has relied on Harris being exceptional in the past and the fact that we all had the same thing to say about Collaros @ SSK in 2019 it's a fair assessment. The one guy with the hot take basically said the entire division was going to be 7-7 tied with Winnipeg on the losing end of the tiebreakers... I personally think he's being too generous with BC's chances and too high on Edmonton but it's not like he was calling us trash either.

MCL is kinda close to the calf right

I totally agree with this - after the first punt it becomes so chaotic that the most likely outcome is a no-yards penalty... which is really unfortunate.

Technically in Manitoba a parent bringing their underage kid to a game could allow them to have a beer as long as they also ensured they were eating a meal.

Also incentives the opposing team to try and run the ball out of the endzone on a missed but not through field goal attempt.

I don't mind the change to point after attempts. The fact is that the 1 point convert is the least interesting play in a football game... generally speaking it only ever gets missed due to the kicker making a mistake (rather than a player on the opposing team making a play). I don't know about 3 point attempts (I think that's too much) - but maybe something like kicking a 1 point should be the equivalent of a 45 yard field goal OR standard 2 point rules OR 1 point attempts from the 1 yard line (I.E. two different ways to go for a 1 pt attempt, kick a 45 yard field goal OR goal line sneak (unreviewable))

Heh... LOTS of attempted forward passes while being hit turned into fumbles with that kind of rule change

I get the impression the DB isn't interested in the amount of travel going to TSN would entail. He already misses a fair number of out of town games.

You forgot the part where in nineteen ninety eight the undertaker threw mankind off hеll in a cell, and plummeted sixteen feet through an announcer's table.

You'd be shocked how often Cops make constitutional errors which can allow guilty individuals get off, it's one of the reasons the law system is perceived as being biased against the poor in the US. Since errors by cops can get people off, good (read:expensive) lawyers are far more likely to discover and exploit those errors. Poor people can't afford the lawyers who have the resources to find the errors. My post was based on the news article which explicitly states that a border agent called ahead to the checkstop to pull their car over because his dog signalled when it passed by him. Unless the news report is almost entirely incorrect about the sequence of events it surely sounds like these guys will have a shot at getting off (EVEN IF they consented to the search, if the reason they were asked was due to the dog signalling the entire chain of evidence could end up being tossed)

The dog sniffing for drugs is IN OF ITSELF considered a search so the police can't use the dog alerting as probable cause for making a search. I.E. police can't walk up and down streets with a drug sniffing dog and when the dog alerts at a house, use that alert as probable cause for obtaining a warrant to search the house for drugs. It's a little less clear with dogs alerting during routine traffic stops - IF a driver has committed some other driving offense AND the dog alerts while the officer is dealing with that offense then the search for drugs is OK. Checkpoints further complicate the question, from what I understand at checkpoints police need to have pre-determined that they will pull over every nth car (every 2nd car, 5th car, 10th car, etc) to check for whatever the checkpoint is there to check for. They can't actually change their rules for the checkpoint mid-stream. So the border agent whose dog alerted him OUTSIDE of the checkpoint might not actually have the right to tell the checkpoint to do a further search because his dog alerting outside of the checkpoint is actually an illegal search by the dog.

Really small school - Played against not very good players, with not very good players, in a not very good division. Doesn't mean he couldn't be an NFL level talent... just might not have gotten the chance to show it.

They weren't trying to cross a border - the US does this dumb **** on their borders where they put immigration/federal law checkpoints up to 100 miles away from the actual border. They actually aren't necessarily hooped - if they hire a good lawyer and those federal agents didn't do a good job of documenting their probable cause (The story says they passed by an agent whose dog signalled him as they passed) AND they didn't consent to have their vehicle searched (this is important). It's possible the search could be found to be a violation of their 4th amendment rights and therefore the evidence discovered in the search is inadmissible. A lot of ifs.

I think the Cardinal GM calling him a legend makes it highly unlikely that we'll be seeing him back in the CFL this year... league politics probably means that declaration gives him at least a full year with the Cards.

I think the combo of Darvin yapping at guys + blowing them up as a blocker really gets under their skin... One of the things I really remember from the highlights is constantly seeing LB/DB's getting pissy at Darvin (throughout the season) - I'm actually surprised we didn't get more unsportsmanlike conducts go our way for chippy **** the DB's would do to Darvin throughtout the year.

I have a really good relationship with Coach (Glen) Young, but he wasn’t in the city at the time. Also, I have a really good relationship with Mike Davis, their D-line coach. He had just left the city when we were flying in. I guess it was a good thing I didn’t see the people who I have those relationships with that might have made the decision even harder for me. ROFL - cmon guys... you are rolling out the red carpet for the guy, at least make sure you've got the D coaches you know he's worked with in the past there to boost your chances.