TrueBlue4ever

I would have debated some of your points, but if this is your default position, that our 7-2 starting QB had nothing to do with any of our success at all, then there is really no point in trying to reason with you.

Remind me again who on this site always ******* about stupid Rider fans who wear their gear while on holidays on the beach outside of Canada and says how dumb it is?

Love how everyone who complains about the dysfunctional offence pretends it had to do with the LaPo system and Nichols checkdowns and ignores the fact that Streveler taking over the controls coincides with the decrease in production (and wins).

But honestly, if the Dems took control of everything, would the public really be that bloodthirsty that they'd want a true revenge investigation on people who had already been voted out? Trump has enough criminal investigation pending from SDNY to face after he leaves office that I don't think the sitting government would try to expose all his wrongdoings while president. THAT would look like cheap political point scoring (which I would personally enjoy but would not accomplish anything).

Here is the full list of Super Bowl/Grey Cup dual winners (12 in total) as far as I have researched it (accurate to 2015, not aware of any others since then, but not confirmed): NOTE: Super Bowl year refers to the NFL season played, not the actual calendar year of the game itself (so a team listed as winning in 1987 actually won the Super Bowl game in January 1988) OJ Brigance: GC - Baltimore 1995, SB - Baltimore 2001 (only player to win both playing for the same city) Brandon Browner: GC - Calgary 2008, SB - Seattle 2013 (did not play in game, suspended) and New England 2014 Dan Federkeil: SB - Indianapolis 2006, GC - Calgary 2014 Terry Greer: GC - Toronto 1983, SB - San Francisco 1989 and 1990 Harald Hasselbach: GC - Calgary 1992, SB - Denver 1997 and 1998 Tim Jessie: SB - Washington 1987, GC - Winnipeg 1988 (as noted, only player to win both in the same calendar year) Josh Miller: GC - Baltimore 1995, SB - New England 2005 (greatest gap between championships) Andre Rison: SB - Green Bay 1996, GC - Toronto 2004 Bobby Singh: SB - St. Louis 1999, GC - BC 2006 (also won an XFL title with LA in 2001, the only player to pull off the NFL/CFL/XFL trifecta) Alvin Walton: SB - Washington 1987 and 1991, GC - Baltimore 1995 Barry Wilburn: SB - Washington 1987, GC - BC 1994 Tyrone Williams: SB - Dallas 1992 (practice roster player only) and 1993 (roster but did not play in SB game itself), GC - Toronto 1996 Two other fun bits of trivia: Yo Murphy won a World Bowl title with Scotland in 1996 (was the game MVP to boot), won a Grey Cup with BC in 1994 and with Saskatchewan in 2007, and lost the Super Bowl with St. Louis in 2001 (and played in the XFL as well, only player to start in all 4 leagues and play in the WLAF/NFL/CFL title games) Jackson Jeffcoat won the Grey Cup with Winnipeg in 2019, and does not have a Super Bowl ring but could easily inherit a pair. His dad Jim won 2 titles as a player with Dallas in 1992 and 1993.

So with the impeachment trial winding down, I had pondered what the Democrats could do to still keep it relevant. Let's face it, the Liberal SNC Lavelin scandal proved that the public has short memories when it comes to scandal and "we'll remember this at election time". So with the acquittal coming without question, I had considered if the Dems had another option to hold Trump to some kind of account, and questioned if an amendment to censure but not remove might be floated. And lo and behold CNN just did a piece on it. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/03/opinions/censure-trump-dent-lockhart/index.html So would the Dems swallow a bit of pride and offer this concession? Would it be better for them politically to have a chastened President in power over the summer and eliminate the "total exoneration, perfect call" tagline, or would it hurt them to back off and give the GOP and out? Would it do anything to rein in the seemingly Teflon Trump anyway, who will convince himself he has been vindicated (remember the Ukraine call came the NEXT DAY after Mueller testified and decided Trump couldn't be prosecuted)? Would the Republicans take this out? Given that Sens. Alexander and Murkowski conceded that the call was wrong and the evidence proven, but not impeachable conduct, and Rubio went even further saying that even if an impeachable standard has been met, removing the President from office is too great a cost, some have painted themselves into a corner and would be more hard pressed to justify acquitting if what they feared - impeachment and removal - were off the table, and they have already admitted he did do it. Or would they suffer more wrath for going against Trump at all (the "head on a pike" alleged threat)? Thoughts?

Did you know...... Tennessee Titans are halfway to becoming only the 3rd #6 seed to win the Super Bowl, and only the 2nd to beat the #1,2,3 seeds in their own conference and #1 seed in the other conference. The other team? Pittsburgh Steelers (2005). Pittsburgh in 2005 beat Cincinnati (#3), Indianapolis (#1), Denver (#2) and Seattle (#1), beating teams with 51 combined wins. Tennessee beat New England (#3) and Baltimore (#1) and face Kansas City (#2) and either San Francisco (#1) or Green Bay (#2) if they get past KC. If they run the table they will have beaten teams with 51 combined wins regardless of whether they play SF or GB. Tennessee (9-7) is the only team who could beat higher seeded rivals who all had better records than them (their opponents were/are all 12-4 or better - Pittsburgh and Cincinnati each were 11-5 in 2005). Only other team to beat teams with 51 combined wins are the New York Giants in 2007 as the #5 seed, beating Tampa Bay (#4), Dallas (#1), Green Bay (#2) and the undefeated New England Patriots (#1). The Giants at 10-6 had a better record than 9-7 Tampa despite being a lower seed (Tampa won their division). The only other #6 seed to win is Green Bay in 2010, beating Philly(#3), Atlanta (#1), Chicago (#2), and Pittsburgh (#2), teams with 46 total wins. Philly and Green Bay both were 10-6. What does this have to do with the CFL? Well, the Bombers this past year became only the 6th #3 seed to win the Grey Cup since the current playoff format was adopted in 1974, and became only the 3rd team to beat the #1, 2, and 3 seeds in the league on the way to the title. Sask. in 1989 and BC in 2000 were the other 2. BC's opponents won 34 games combined, and Saskatchewan's won 38. The other 2 CFL teams who beat opponents with a combined 40 wins (the league record) were Edmonton in 1993 and BC in 1994, and both of them had the benefit of a home game (BC's home game is an asterisk because it was the "neutral site" Grey Cup which was in BC that year). All this to say it is arguable that the Bombers Grey Cup run this year may have been the toughest and most impressive ever in the current format. Will the Titans match this improbable feat?

And yet you spend how much time on this board?

Too bad, for 3 minutes of reading, you might learn something. And it's off season. You really in that much of a rush?

Wow, are you bucking to be Streveler's agent? So much "fact" spinning here. As much as some say the NFL game is evolving, the traditional approach is to have a QB who is "pass first, run if necessary". NFL may want athletes with multiple skills at other positions, but for a QB they want someone who can throw the ball. Look at the all-time greats in the NFL since the 1980's and the introduction of the more dynamic ("west coast" offence): Fouts, Marino, Montana, Moon, Kelly, Manning, Brady, Brees, Aikman, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Warner. All those with staying power were pocket passers who could scramble if needed but by and large were good because of their arm and ability to read the field, not because of their legs. Even the most mobile of them - Favre and Elway, were recognized more for their passing stats than their running stats. And the best of the "running" QBs, Steve Young, only became top tier after he learned to be a pinpoint pocket passer and utilize the weapons around him (cough, Jerry Rice) rather than do it on his own. Russell Wilson seems to be evolving into this as well, and Patrick Mahomes is successful because he can throw with the best of them. QBs who have lived mainly off the run are typically flash in the pan types, who burst on the scene with a lot of hype and promise to "change the game" with never before seen skills, only to fade away once teams learn to defend their running and force them to pass, proving they can't do it well enough to last. Steve McNair, Randall Cunningham (who may have been the best passer of this group), Michael Vick, Tim Tebow, Colin Kaepernick, and now Lamar Jackson are the flavour of the month, but how many of them (the best of the best of the running QBs) lasted playing that style once teams caught on to how to defend them? Look what Tennessee did to Jackson this past week by simply spying him with an extra safety. As for this year's final 4 in the NFL, where is the running QB (as opposed to the QB who can put up 350 yards passing) in that mix? Not in San Fran (where the tailback is their best receiver, hmmm, lots of check down passes in a successful offence, imagine that), definitely not in Green Bay, not even in KC (Mahomes can scramble better than most, but he is winning with his arm and his reads more than by running an option style offence). Tennessee is winning on the back of a running back playing out of his mind right now and a defence creating huge turnovers in the playoffs. As for your second paragraph, lots of BS hyperbole to unpack here: Dime a dozen QB's who athletically are at the top of their draft class? Really? Top of the draft class? Streveler was a division 2 (now called 1AA) QB, let's not overlook that little nugget. Given the 100+ division 1A QB's out there, I'd be comfortable calling him a dime a dozen. You're going to be hard pressed to find a QB with anywhere near the passing success Streveler had in NCAA (again, division 2. That's like comparing the MJHL scoring leader to the CHL scoring leader) as well as the measurables, then add on what he's done here. His completion percentage was 66.6%, which sounds good until you look at the other starters who averaged 3-5% better than him for the most part - he was 9th out of 12 QBs with 175 or more attempts. He threw 8 TDs to 14 INTs. Intercepted on 6% of his passes, last for QBs with 175 or more attempts, and 1.5% worse than the next guy, Dominique Davis. His interception % was 39th of the 43 CFL QBs who threw any passes at all last year. His QB rating was 72.0, 11th out of 12 for 175+ attempts and 30th overall - only Davis was behind him at 71.7 for high throwing QBs, the average for the 12 was 96.8, and the 10 ahead of Streveler and Davis averaged 101.8. Passing-wise, Streveler was sub-par at the CFL level. And once teams here figured out how to spy him, the Bombers started losing games. 4-8 as a starter over 2 years. So you want him to become a running back in the NFL? At 6'1 and 217 lbs? Dude is a long way off from having the skills to compete at the NFL level IMO. There are some pure option/RPO guys that might run as fast, but not a single one like him as a total package. See my earlier stats about his passing ability - hardly "the whole package". A football player who is willing to be a football player and has trained his whole life as a QB, huge football IQ. Football IQ based on his out-of-college scouting report? The eye test this year in how he read defences and didn't go past his first read often would suggest his IQ needs work. A team is going to roster him to run certain packages. Hill is the blueprint. Again, this is not really what NFL teams build their QB position around historically, and their are QBs with better college pedigrees in Division 1A than him. Average NFL linebackers come in at 6'2" and 245 lbs. DEs are 6'4", 279 lbs. DTs at 6'3", 309 lbs. (source: https://webpages.uidaho.edu/~renaes/251/HON/Student PPTs/Avg NFL ht wt.pdf) Average CFL LBs are 6'1", 224 lbs. DEs are 6'3", 250 lbs. DTs are 6'3", 289 lbs. DLs (not specified) are 6'3", 267 lbs. (source: www.cfl.ca) Streveler won't bowl over defensive players of that size quite as easily. Hey, good luck to the guy, but's let's not go overboard selling him as this phenom who is the next big thing in the NFL who all teams are clamoring for.

4-8.

Given Copp is the only veteran mentioned in the post, not sure how else to take it. And Goalie never misses a chance to take a shot at Maurice, too bad the facts and results so often don't support the hatred.

Not bad for a garbage veteran, eh Goalie?

2020 is starting off as the year of the death of sports figures. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/03/us/sam-wyche-dies/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/02/us/don-larsen-pitcher-dies/index.html Both post-season no-hit pitchers are no longer with us.

Thought I would resurrect this post in light of the win, and having had time to soak it in and get over the pure reactionary emotion of each game. So with a new decade upon us and over a month of reflection on our amazing playoff run, I am wondering (a) if any of the 3 playoff wins this year have now become THAT ONE WIN (answer, very likely), and more curiously, (b) which game is THAT game? Winning the WSF in Calgary the way we did felt the most like slaying the dragon and getting the revenge win (down at the half, we flip a switch and just light it up offensively while completely dominating defensively against the team who had dominated us all decade long - call back to the 1970's-80's vibe against the Eskies). This was the most unexpected win of the 3 in my mind, so does that make it more special than either of the other 2, because it gave us real hope? The WF in Sask. of course is huge because of the rivalry, because of how tough is has been to win there on Labour Day (although for some reason it hasn't carried over to other games there), because it got us in to the Cup, and the last 3 minutes were so insane the game gets elevated into "instant classic" status. I was in the stands for that one (best road trip decision of my life), and being there in person certainly raises the bar of "best game ever" for me. But maybe their most poorly played game of the 3. And then there is the Grey Cup itself, going in as underdogs to a dominant 15-3 team and laying waste to them. Funny that the blowout almost (ALMOST) seems to diminish the "best game ever" vibe because there was no roller coaster of emotions and then that explosion of joy when we grab it at the end. The outcome looking back was decided in the first half for sure. But it's the big dance, so that alone elevates its status. Just a methodical beat down. And I've talked to a few people about this game, and one thing that struck me was their feeling as the clock wore down. One feeling that I shared. I was hosting a Grey Cup party, and after the called back Bailey TD which became a FG, I still felt that was the (anti-climactic) nail in the coffin, and my guests asked why I was being so quiet and not cheering madly as the clock ran out. I remarked that at this point, the weight of 29 years, and more so that simple number being pounded into our heads all the time left me more relieved than elated. A friend later said he had the same reaction, and said that he never realized how much of that losing streak he carried with him over that time and how much it wore him down, to the point that finally winning was more like the end of grieving instead of a celebration. All this to say that the Grey Cup win felt less dramatic and exhilarating to me (in the immediate aftermath) than either of the other 2, even if it was the most important of the wins. So which of the 3 games ranks as your best Bomber win, given some time to digest it all?

I chose to ignore it - see what I did there?

There is always an ignore feature - it's called your own common sense and your brain. Seriously, how impossible is it to disregard someone's comments that you need a machine to do the editing for you?

The GDT isn't any better for overly dramatic histrionics when the team is losing (take a gander at the WSF thread and you'd swear the entire front office was going to be blown up at halftime - good for a laugh), but why pay more for chat when the GDT serves the exact same purpose. I would not miss it if it were gone, but I leave the decision to the site runners.

Sorry, didn’t see the double notice in one post.

Radio shock jock Don Imus, age 79.

For you, good sir. You may remove it at day's end. Although you have given me an idea for a topic thread that may sustain us through the off-season on the board.

Not sure how the Supreme Court gets around the conflict of interest in this case. If a sitting judge is hearing a case involving a former client (when they were a lawyer) the judge must recuse themselves. If a case involves a government official, to avoid any sense of bias, a judge from another jursdicition would be brought in. How in the world can Kavanaugh and Gorsuch sit on a panel impartially hearing a case involving the man who put them on the bench? They SHOULD recuse themselves and have a panel of 7 sit.

That's Boobie Miles. Please don't misquote one of the great sports movies of all time.