TrueBlue4ever

Same with me. Picking up a buddy in Brandon, one day trip. Sec. 139 row 27 behind the Bomber bench on the 45 yard line. Tix were resale, $60 below face value each. First road playoff game ever.

I think Westwood actually was perfect in the 2007 game. In fact, except for one game in 2001 (we ALL know which one) he was very accurate in the playoffs. Fat lot of good that did though. The one time we needed him to come through he decides to have his worst game as a pro. What is irritating is to hear Westwood say he knew Roberts was out all night. And I've heard Milt Stegall talk about never winning a ring and say "All I know is that I came prepared and was mentally and physically ready to have my best game on Grey Cup day. Won't speak for my teammates, and I saw some of them take a different attitude, but for my part I made sure I was able to perform at my best on Grey Cup sunday" (paraphrasing but that is as close to accurate as I recall). So, as Speedflex asked, why couldn't these veteran teammates get Charlie in line and keep him in check on Grey Cup week?

We are 54 hours away. Do I sound excited? I feel like I'm getting excited.

Just got my seats too! And 33% off on resale. Saw them win the inaugural Canada Day game, now time to see the march to the Grey Cup.

Wait, didn't this guy get the last one?

I agree that this scheme is totally set up for this week, given how he NEVER showed he was going to throw last week. Simplest way to deal with a "run first" QB (which Streveler really started to become more and more as he progressed as a starter - Hamilton and Sask in their 3rd game against us figured this out, Montreal a little bit) is to spy the QB with the MLB and just ignore everything else. If the RB gets the ball, it is the job of the rest of the line to stop him, MLB keeps spying. So the way to beat that is more option tosses or the late throw. At this point I think very few expect to see a pass from Streveler (and the majority expect a QB keeper rather than a hand-off) when he enters the game. Will be fascinating to see what LaPo has devised to utilize both of his QB's strengths and weaknesses.

Booch, am I wrong that jamming at the line seems to be largely a non-thing in the CFL? Is it solely because of the unlimited pre-snap motion from the receivers, too hard to jam them when they are on the run like that? Or am I not seeing what I think I am not seeing?

First - extremely rare that both your QB's go down in one game. And how often do we ever see a third stringer get into a game? Second - I am not saying Streveler can't throw. But you are presenting a game plan where he is acting like a runner, not a passer. You don't need a second QB on the field with him to make the opposition guard against him running or passing, he can do that himself at the QB position. And with Adams being able to throw as well, and Demski, Harris, and Streveler being able to be in the back field at one time, we already have a system that offers those multiple looks. Don't need to add a second QB to that mix to confuse the issue. Not at the sake of another roster position, anyway.

With the way Collaros has thrown a few into heavy coverage that have been dropped by the opposition, and looking at Fajardo's slower tosses in practice to guard against re-aggravating his injury, I have a hunch we WILL see a pick-6 this weekend. Just a gut call, praying it is the Blue and Gold running one back.

We just have to guard against his patented blind side roll out. Have seen it enough to know that that is his only consistent escape plan. Come in with control and don't overcommit, and he could spin his way into a big loss on a sack.

Depends on how injured. If he was so injured that in hindsight he should not have played, then yes. But an injured Streveler was better than no Streveler and McGuire in his role. I don't see Harker and think "oh boy, this might burn us". Honestly, I think the possibility of Shaq Evans being out is a bigger deal than Fajardo playing at less than 100%.

I don't see that happening. CFL rosters are too small to mess around with a gimmick system like that. When you have to play starters on your special teams, you aren't going to use up a position playing a 3rd QB in a non-QB role. Why have a QB who does nothing but run when you can have an actual running back? If a QB can throw well enough, then make him a QB. If he can't, you don't want him on the team instead of an Augustine or Oilviera.

That's only because the mini putt rule is a max 8 strokes per hole. Otherwise we'd see double digits, right?

Does the MLB play a role at all in this? I know a big hitter at safety can make receivers leery of running those deep crossing routes for fear of getting plastered. Would the MLB in a similar mentality 5-7 yards off the line make the receivers hear footsteps on those quick slants?

The downfall of that team started when Charlie Roberts walked out for 2 days in week 19 because he wasn't getting enough touches.

That's all right. Innocent mistake. Not at all bitter (and I'm sorry about those things I said about your mother in my P.M. That was uncalled for). You can just keep this for the rest of the day.

This was in fact the 1985 West Final. Not appreciated. Seriously, is this ban-worthy?

Wow, judging by the comments people seem to have forgotten our "guaranteed" victory against "non-formidable" foe Marcus Crandell in the 2001 Grey Cup. Beware the rope-a-dope, people.

Careful now, you can't just go and turn over random cars on a whim, fuelled by nothing but emotion. You want to warm up and train for that kind of thing, otherwise you might pull an oblique muscle or something.

I'll lead off saying the losses seem more memorable than the wins. Glory is fleeting, pain endures. And 1984 Grey Cup was glorious but I was too young to understand the 22 year drought and the agony of losing to the Eskimos for so many years leading up to that win, so it isn't quite as meaningful to me. I think the next Grey Cup win will have more impact because of this current dry spell. But if pressed I think the 1988 Grey Cup is likely at the top, given how it came about (the 1987 team was supposed to be there and crapped the bed at home in the East Final, in 1988 very few bothered to show up for the division semi against Hamilton because everyone figured we were going to lose in Toronto the next week, and the way the Grey Cup unfolded with us being heavy underdogs, with punting of all things keeping us in it, and "the Immaculate Interception" being that signature play from that signature game sticks with me forever. The Matt Dunigan 713 game and Milt's Commonwealth 100 yard last play miracle rank up there for pure spectacle, but this moment seemed bigger. As for losses, a few jump out, like the 2007 Grey Cup (because Sask for the first time ever and a stupid broken arm that really killed our chances when we would have been favoured), the 1987 East Final (NOTHING went our way that day, we looked inept after being a machine on offence all year), and the 1994 East Final at home to Baltimore (14-12 loss in still the best football game I have ever watched live, where fumbles that weren't fumbles, non-fumbles that were, cross bars breaking up TD passes, a blown fake field goal, illegal shoe controversy, and every break going against us led to an agonizing last minute loss on a long field goal that grazed the cross bar), and 52-0 on Labour Day (the humiliating low point of the Mack era) but two rise above those. One is of course the 2001 Grey Cup, since we fell so flat after being so much better than every other team that season, compounded by the fact that we lost to a team with a losing record that we let get into the playoffs in the last week by resting our starters. Then hearing about how arrogant the team had been all week and how they did not really take the opposition seriously, and all the partying and "ring sizing" they did before the game was infuriating. The final insult is that it had been 11 years without a Cup at that point, and knowing now that it would stretch to 29 and counting and this was such a missed opportunity, completely galling. The only thing missing is the "revenge" factor to put this at the top. And so, surprisingly, the one loss that really irks me more than all others was the West semi in 1996 against the Eskimos. The end of the Cal Murphy era was the most humiliating end possible. 68-7. They went out of their way to pile up the score, and then hearing how they blatantly cheated with illegal shoes and got away with it when it was so obvious all game to everyone but the blind refs that they were using trickery was maddening. This is the one loss I want revenge for, because I feel we didn't just lose, we didn't just get embarrassed on a historic level, but that we lost that badly because were cheated out of it and they got away with it.

So Speedflex posted this in the "WF Bombers @ Riders" thread: This is my ultimate revenge game as a fan. Who else remembers the 1972 Western Final? Who the teams were? Where they finished in the standings? The horrible way the Bombers lost that game? For us old timers with lonnnnnnnnng memories, just how glorious will it be if we beat the Riders in their home park? In front of their fans? And how good will it feel for us to break their hearts??? The teams are the same but the standings reversed. They're hosting instead of us. Pressure is on them to win in front of their own fans in their House in front of a big crowd. I've waited 47 years for this game. Please Bombers, wash the stench of that loss in 1972 away finally. FINALLY!!! This has been brewing in him for 47 years, this match is not just a playoff game, not just a game against our most hated rival, not just another chance to get to the Grey Cup and end the streak, this is REVENGE. This got me to thinking - what one win in Bomber history have you each cherished more than any other, and what one loss has burned worse than any other? What is the pinnacle moment, the signature game that you will carry with you forever? Is it just a great moment, a historic victory, or does it carry something even more profound? (think Donovan Bailey winning the 100M gold in Atlanta - glorious moment, but because of what went down in Seoul in 1988 with Ben Johnson, made it all the much more sweet. Not just that he won, but that the whole country found redemption) What factors raised the win to an even greater emotional high than normal? Likewise, what loss stings more than any other, and more importantly, why? I know a bit about the 1972 loss, mainly the end. This was the first time we'd hosted the West final since 1962 (and amazingly, the 1972 game is the last time we have hosted the West Final at all!). For anyone unfamiliar with the result and more importantly the circumstances, here is the synopsis: Had a good lead heading into the half I believe, and Sask. tied it up and went for a game winning FG. I'll let Wikipedia pick it up from here - This game was especially notable for its final play. The game was tied and Saskatchewan attempted a last-second field goal to win, or at least score a single. The kick missed wide, and was recovered by Winnipeg in the end zone. As they were unable to run it out, they punted. The Saskatchewan player who fielded the punt attempted to score a single (winning the game) by punting it through the end zone again, but was unsuccessful, and the punt was fielded by Winnipeg, who punted it out again. The Saskatchewan returner was tackled, ending the play and presumably the game, but a Winnipeg penalty for no yards negated the play and gave Saskatchewan another chance. The second Saskatchewan field goal attempt, with no time on the clock, was successful. So I'd love to hear from folks what one win and/or one loss have you never let go of?

That is all.

#1 rushing offence. #1 rushing defence. Best running back in the league. QB who is on a 4 game winning streak against Calgary. Beat defensive player in the game. Best o-lineman in the game the last 3 years. Eric Rogers won’t be playing for Calgary. Dominant special teams against Calgary all year.

And I was just noticing that the "me" is there only if you read it backwards (apply backwards thinking) and acknowledge that the letters are on either side of the A (embracing the a-hole, as it were). Does that literal deconstruction of the wordplay without the subliminal subtext satisfy you, or is there another double entendre you would like to break down to remove any humour and larger point from?

Don't you love it when fans on an internet board know better than the head coach about player deployment? FWIW, here's Paul Maurice (of 700+ NHL wins fame) and his thoughts on fan input (go to 1:22 left in the video). https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/hours-paul-maurice-reaching-700-wins-nhl-head-coach/