TrueBlue4ever

That would work too.

I don’t imagine anyone is going to write an epitaph on their tombstone saying “It was worth it not to look silly in a mask”.

I'll agree that it was a messed up attempt, but I disagree that it turns more people off than it draws in. At best it's a neutral issue. No hard core fan who is watching the Grey Cup for the football is going to say "Well that does it. Having an in-broadcast interview with this celebrity has soured me so much that I'm going to shut off the TV and not watch the completion of the first Bomber Grey Cup win in 29 years." Many on this site have railed against Rod Black's coverage for what feels like forever, and yet you are all still here following the game and commenting on the things he says, which means you are still watching him. As for the casual fan, they are watching for the spectacle as much as anything, so a bit more Keith Urban is not something they will complain about. Remember when Justin Beiber did the halftime show at the 100th Grey Cup? The game itself averaged 5.5 million viewers, but the halftime jumped to an average of 6.1 million, peaking at 7 million viewers. This for a guy who was booed mercilessly in the stadium. And all the wives who were at my Grey Cup party and had been blabbing in the kitchen in the first half while the hubbys watched the game were glued to Keith's performance and then paid attention when he came up to the booth later to chat, and stayed to watch the football afterwards. I can do without it, but in today's world this is a pretty silly thing to get your knickers in a twist over.

Wasn't '87. That year the league I think created the CFN (Canadian Football Network) and Dave Hodge did the game. Lancaster was at it next year with Don Wittman for the Bomber-Lion Cup in Ottawa. Lancaster was still at it in 1990 with Witt again for the Bomber-Eskie Cup game. I know he went back into coaching the next season with Edmonton and never broadcast again since he coached straight through until 2003.

Mike Jones' "critical" interception came with 36 seconds left on the clock and the Bombers up 33-12. He had 4 tackles in the game (Sayles led with 6) and 1 special teams tackle in the second level of tackling (19 yard gain on the punt return before his tackle). He did knock Banks out of the game and had 3 pass knockdowns, including the big one against his namesake for the Ticats (who also got injured, so if you want to argue that he wins the MVP for causing the most injuries on the opposing side, I'll give you that one). Jones was covering Banks for the first half, and Banks was the game's leading receiver before he got knocked out. Very solid game for sure, and I'd award him the Happy Honker for the timing of that pass knockdown on the goalline in the third quarter when it was 27-12. Jefferson had 2 tackles, 3 sacks, and 2 forced fumbles, including the biggest one that directly led to Harris' first touchdown which gave the Bombers a lead they would never surrender. Splashier stats and his pressures kept Evans off balance all game. He was also part of a line that forced 2 turnovers on 3rd and short when the Ticats had not been stopped all year on that play. I'd put Jefferson over Jones. However, it is arguable that Jeffcoat had an even bigger game. 4 tackles (including a big tackle for a loss against Banks on an end-around sweep that stalled the Ticats drive in Winnipeg territory and forced a field goal to make it 7-3 instead of 7-7 possibly). Also 2 sacks, had a third taken away because of a Jefferson roughing penalty, forced a fumble which he recovered himself, and the aforementioned pressure and 3rd down stuffs. Of the 7 turnovers the Bombers had, 2 were fumbles forced by the d-line and 2 were failed 3rd down sneaks, and add in 6 sacks for good measure, so the line played a critical role in the tempo of the game. I would give it to Jeffcoat barely over Jefferson, but Harris had the biggest first half of them all where the game was essentially decided, so he is probably the rightful winner. Disagree?

I can't imagine how this place would be right now had we not won the Cup again and had the delay to the start of the season right now. That win has washed away so many frustrations and kept a lid on the anxiety of the current state of things. I still remember this board at halftime of the Calgary game, when O'Shea was being fired and run out of town along with LaPo and Richie Hall.

I was in Regina for the West Final (which is now the best CFL game I have ever attended live, replacing the 1994 Division Final against Baltimore and the Matt Dunigan 713 game as my previous co-favorites), and driving home after I listened to the entire pre-game, game and post-game show on the CJOB audio vault just to hear how Bob Irving called the game I had just seen live. Most enjoyable 6 hour drive of my life.

I still have all 3 playoff games on my PVR. Will not be deleting those for a long time, especially while the current season is on hiatus.

So I am curious as to why you each see this as the outcome? What kind of hard numbers do you think would be needed? I saw one quote of over $100, if you are talking per game I'm not sure where that figure would come from. I don't think you can compare to a $65 cost for a UFC "event" evening and need to consider a package like NHL Network of NFL Sunday Ticket. I'm just throwing out numbers with no real heavy in-depth analysis, so please point out all the flaws in my accounting (I'm sure there are many). But the stats I found showed an average weekly 2019 TV audience of around 500,000 fans per CFL game on TV, with increased numbers for bigger games like Canada Day, Labour Day, Thanksgiving, and playoffs pushing 1,000,000 viewers, and Grey Cup 3-4 times that. If you charged $10 per game based on 500,000 average TV fans per game, over an 81 game season that's over $400 million. For me, who spends $1600 per year for 2 season ticket seats and parking (and I'm not considering buying drinks, food, or 50/50 tickets), the cost of $810 for an entire year of every CFL game doesn't seem that exorbitant to me given what I'm already paying for just 10 games. And the NFL Sunday ticket is something like $300-400 is it not, just to be able to watch an early and a late afternoon game of your choice, but you are paying for 2 full games of action. Now of course, ratings for free TV do not equate to the same ratings for pay-per-view, but the boost in CFL Draft ratings does show an appetite for the game, and with nothing else live or new on, one would think that this would create a boost in the numbers, especially to those won't have no other option to see a game with fans not allowed in the stands. Yes, one PPV subscription could cover 2-4 people vs. one person, one seat bought at a game, but even if you cut ratings in half and factored in that one PPV purchase covers 2 people, that's 125,000 subscribers per game and over $100,000,000 in the season. So I'm sure this is way too simplistic, and I'm not trying to be contrarian here. I want to explore what the numbers would be and how people get to the individual figures they think are realistic. How far off are my estimates and why are they off?

All I know is, without Ambrosie, this would never have happened.

Without citing any evidence of women’s intelligence, I can confidently say that, based on the actions of men throughout history alone as my basis, I have every reason to believe women certainly are inherently no dumber.

Criminals are accused of many things. Being smart is never at the top of the list of those accusations.

If the Rodney King video could result in acquittals, nothing would surprise me here.

Aw, and we were doing so well just ignoring Pigseye's posts for a while.

Since you bypassed the first half of the video, here is part of what she is referring to, based on the doctor she name dropped. https://time.com/5820556/ventilators-covid-19/

Nope. Well aware of the history, parties involved in this specific instance (not that it would be different for any other pairs of posters, not singling these guys out as the problem - we all have it in spades, present company included), and the nature of internet boards in general. Just thought I'd flag it early, hopefully nip it in the bud, and avoid the inevitable 3 pages of sniping and irrelevant tangents. But hey, I'm not the police (yet, I've declined the request to moderate), so have at it if you wish. Or is that an inaccurate assessment?

How to derail a thread 101.

Hey, hey, hey. Hands off my avatar!

More for the 98% to consider and the 2% to dismiss with whataboutisms. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/04/29/joe-biden-sexual-assault-allegation-tara-reade-column/3046962001/

Do you mean punching certain people in the face when all other reasonable options fail? Right there with you.

Well played, sir.

Except it's raccoon, with 2 "C's". But who needs accuracy when you have a clever meme, right. internet? Kind of like this fake that's making the rounds:

He already did the "100,000-200,000 will be a success, because it could have been millions" speech a month ago, so he already set his goalposts before. He also saved "billions and billions of lives because of the China travel ban" - very impressive for a country of 330 million.