TrueBlue4ever

And Tragically Hip concerts. Meanwhile, Harper does this: (That's actually a gif - Harper's actually that stiff in a moving picture).

Oops. totally missed that last sentence. And Powell is back from injury so Madu didn't even play. This contest sucks, the world is against me, I hate everyone!

But even if you don't get a score in both games, you still get two chances with a RedBlack player compared to one with any other player. It's actually twice the advantage (two cracks at no strike PLUS the chance to get a strike removed). I was hoping for the chance to pick two separate players if they weren't RedBlacks vs. one RedBlack player for both games. Anyway, given the offer, I will avoid my original Messam pick and take Madu.

Well that sucks.

So here's my dilemma for picking this game. Ray seems to have re-discovered the magic he had 3 years or so ago, and he has lit up the Bombers so many times in the past I can't count. SJ Green will be going up against Carmichael according to the pre-game reports - is there a bigger mis-match on paper right now in the entire league for receiver/DB match-ups? Richie Hall's defence is "rush 3 or 4, almost no blitzes, give the other team short stuff and let them dink and dunk until they mess up" rather than "pressure but risk the big play". Is there a better QB at taking advantage of the conservative defence in the last 15 years in the CFL than Ricky Ray? And add Mark Trestman to that equation, and that's a scary game plan we may have going on tonight. And the Argo receiving injury is offset by the absence of Wild and Okpalaugo. Hurl and Knox at LB does not give me the warm fuzzies. Am I wrong to think that their offense is set up really well against our defence tonight? And if we need to rely on turnovers to win like all of last year, Ray is pretty good at protecting things. Now I think Nicholls and our weapons can match Ray offensively, but that front 7 of Toronto looked pretty awesome against Hamilton (really impressive stunts and schemes by their coaches), and we saw what a pressured Nicholls did last week against Calgary (and for half the game against Sask), so how our o-line dictates the play seems to be the key to everything, especially getting as big run game from Harris to burn the clock. And do we need to see a 7/7 field goal game from Medlock to win? So my analysis is lots of doom and gloom from a match-ups perspective - here's the big question: How much will a very short week hurt Toronto? Play Saturday on the road, probably weren't home until early Sunday morning, day off Sunday, Monday film day, doubtful they practiced much if at all, Tuesday practice, Wednesday travel to Winnipeg per league mandate to get in 24 hours in advance, limited practice I'd speculate, game day Thursday which allows for walk through only. So unless I'm way off on a weekly football schedule, maybe only one real practice day to prep. No? So despite there being no real home advantage here (seriously, 11-26 since this place opened?), is the short week the great equalizer that cancels out all the other factors? Help me out here, trying to decide my pick for the CFL pool I'm in, and this is what I have for the breakdown. What am I missing, overestimating, or underestimating? Would prefer hard logical analysis, not blatant homerism or "sky is falling" negativity without some basis for your takes. thanks.

Just heard that Roc Carmichael will be covering SJ Green tonight. So changing my pick to SJ Green.

10 receptions, 167 yards, 37 points against that lousy D, and still a strike for picking Roosevelt against the Tabbies. But I'm a glutton for punishment, so I'll ride the Ticat train until I'm out. Jeremiah Johnson.

Namaan Roosevelt, SASK.

But by that exact same logic, a team that goes 3/3 and wins by 2 points will say that going for it was the difference between winning and losing. The incorrect assumption is that the single point is automatic, when it no longer is (1 in 10 will miss), and you are giving away points by not taking the sure 1. Look at BC-Edmonton last week. Lions missed two 1 point converts and lost the game by 3. had they gone for 2 and made both (the stats say they have a better chance than not of getting them both) that's 4 extra points and they win the game instead of losing. So your "reality" argument cuts both ways. The numbers suggest that the reward would outweigh the risk over the long term, and that the "reality" is that more teams will benefit and win close games by going for it where the stats indicate a better than 50/50 chance of success than will lose games by taking that risk. Now I'll easily concede that situational dynamics overrules everything, the point simply is that it isn't the overwhelming losing proposition some might believe it to be, and the single isn't the gimme it used to be. (NOTE: Justin Medlock does not approve this message). That's the whole point of the rule change.

Last year the success rate on one point converts was 91%. The two point convert was tried a total of 85 times, with 53 of them being successful, a 62.35% success rate. No team was worse than 50% (Wpg, Sask and Tor all went 2 for 4). Hamilton was the best at it, going 9 for 10. So even if the 1 point convert was 100% successful, it would make more sense to go for 2 every time, because statistically, you will score more points overall as long as the 2 point success rate stays above 50%.

Are you saying 17to85 plays with himself?

I don't mind them. Something unique for Canada Day. Red and black goes well together. And they could be much worse.

Did you mean the car company? Because that's true too.

I think they should still do at least three a year for the next few years. There are 87 years of history to go through, and it would be nice to get to some of the older players/coaches while they are still alive around to bask in the recognition. One a year and many would be deceased by the time you get to them. And I understand that this is a more rarified honour than the HOF induction, but still there are a number who could be saluted. As an aside, wonder if there are specific criteria for induction. Since it is akin to a jersey retiring without actually taking the number out of circulation, it really needs to be saved for the best of the best (much more than the HOF honour). I always thought 3 defining requirements that were the starting point for consideration for inclusion would be: A ) Must be a Blue Bomber for 10 seasons minimum (all current players/coach on the ring fit that requirement, but as you'll see from my suggestions for certain players below, that could exclude them, so maybe 7 is better - 5 seems low but even then that cuts out at least one very notable name) B ) Preferable that their entire career was with the Bombers, but at the least was never traded by or walked away from the club to play elsewhere (rationale is that they were very special and the "lifelong" members of the team and community that deserve the greatest honour). By this criteria, Dieter Brock would not be on the Ring, so I guess the club is not as militant as I am. But I feel loyalty counts here. Just my opinion. Too harsh? C ) Must have accomplished something extraordinary that would be recognized league-wide as a significant milestone, not just as a Blue Bomber notable (ex. Rick House had a Blue Bomber record consecutive games with a pass caught streak, and two 1,000 yard+ seasons, with one nomination for Outstanding Canadian, and was on the 75th anniversary all-time team, but no individual trophies or league records, so not Ring-worthy - also left for Edm. and did not play 10 years with the club, so....) The 75th anniversary team picked the 20 greatest players, and certainly a few of them should be on the ring automatically. Seven of them (Walby, Stegall, Ploen, James, Gray, Brock, Lewis) already there, only Doug Brown - too young at that time, and Bud Grant - coach, made the ring but not that team. Of the other 13: Suspected Locks: Fritz Hanson - the original Bomber star in the 30's (played 7 seasons, so skirting by on my modified (A) criteria) Jack Jacobs - carried the club in the 50's, got a stadium built (my notable name who would fail the (A) criteria as he only played 5 years) Joe Poplawski - named a gate after the guy, would imagine the Ring is next. Put down roots here too, so that counts in his favour. Shorter 9 year career which made me reconsider my (A) tenure criteria, and he won a league award for Outstanding Canadian James Murphy - Second-best receiver numbers-wise in Bomber history, 9 year career all in Blue and Gold, and league MVP. Checks off all my boxes. Bob Cameron - The Bombers were his 8th team if you count training camps, but all stats are with Winnipeg, easily covers the 10 year rule, never traded, and a CFL record for career punting yards. It was him, Ploen, Lewis, Walby and Stegall I looked at when I created my criteria since they all easily fit the boxes and were the obvious choices. But for honouring the older generation of players from the 30's-60's first, he would be my next player inductee. Frank Rigney - 11 years, 4 Grey Cups, 2 Outstanding Linemen awards and 3 all-star nominations in the glory days. The only downside is the anonymity of his position makes this a less obvious choice than it should be. Strong Contenders: Greg Battle - Almost a lock, but a gap in his 9 year tenure. Still, 2 defensive MOPs back-to-back and 2 Grey Cups. But do you think "Hall of Famer" or do you think "all-time legend whose number should never be worn again because we only associate him with it"? Willard Reaves - A league star and owned this town in the mid-80's, league MOP and 3 time CFL all-star with his Grey Cup, but only 5 years with the club. Bonus points for staying here and finding a career in Wpg. after football. Charles Roberts - Leading rusher all-time on the club, 82 TD's, 4 straight 1,500+ yard seasons, 7 straight CFL all-star nods. 7.5 years with the club. BUT....there is that 0.5 years with BC. His trade is the reason I came up with criteria (B). Also, the one league award he actually won was a more minor one (Outstanding special teamer). Maybe just sour grapes from his disruptive mid-season holdout and even more disruptive Grey Cup partying in 2001 which is as big a reason as any for costing us a "sure thing" win. Just not a lock for me. Character matters for the highest honour in Bomberland. Fringe Contenders (the "if you let them in, where is the line/what's the difference between this and the Hall of Fame nod"): Tom Casey - great RB in the 50's and stayed to become a doctor (actually went to med school with my dad), but "only" led the West in rushing once (not the entire league), and no CFL all-star nods (5 western selections). Overshadowed by teammates Jacobs, James, and Lewis. Rick House - see my critique above in the (C) criteria. Certainly can't go in before Poplawski. Doesn't quite check off all the boxes for "legend" status. Tom Clements - this hurts personally as he is my favorite Bomber QB, won a Grey Cup and league MOP to boot, but only put in 5 years with the club. Not enough tenure and doesn't match the Ploen or Jacobs "historical significance to the club" level. Trevor Kennard - When you think legendary Bomber kickers, you start and end with Bob Cameron. If he still was the leading all-time scorer on the club, that would be something, but this (and for Troy Westwood too) is where the whole "must achieve something notable league-wide, not just with the Bombers" needs to be considered. Finally (yeah, I write novels, what of it???) the other one who is on my short list is: Cal Murphy - absolute lock, checks all the boxes for tenure, loyalty and league success, re-built the team as coach and GM in the 80's. 3 Cup rings. Winnipegger to boot. Get him up there NOW! Waffling on Mike Riley - can't ignore 2 Cups as head coach, only Bud Grant has more, and 2 coach of the year awards, but was his tenure long enough? Only 4 years as a head coach, left for greener NFL pastures - twice if you count his aborted departure in 1989, which actually strengthens his cred since the love of the city pulled him back, temporarily at least. Also waffling on Ty Jones - again tenure related (5 years his first go-round, with 3 later years where he wasn't the same force), left Wpg. to play on 2 other teams to end his career, but his CFL success (2 Cups, defensive MOP, Grey Cup MOP and sack record, 4 time CFL all-star) and Bomber all-time sack record get him very close to "lock" status. Any thoughts? Who did I miss?

I thought George Reed and Pinball Clemons were both American. I have read that Reed became a naturalized citizen, and Clemons is a permanent resident, but still American. Interesting choice for both squads.

My original picks were: BC 13-5 Calgary 13-5 (2nd) Edmonton 10-8 Winnipeg 10-8 (4th) Saskatchewan 3-15 Hamilton 11-7 Ottawa 8-10 Montreal 7-11 Toronto 6-12 After week 1 I see no need to change that order, those were my picks and right or wrong it is goofy to change them after week 1. If we are allowed to adjust our rankings based on a do-over after seeing the teams play, I reserve the right to re-visit my picks after week 18. However, some general thoughts about things I may have underappreciated in my original analysis before this past week: BC - still think their offence will be scary good, and they will play in a few 45-40 games, but if they do not get a better showing from their o-line, Jennings may not have the steamboats to have the MOP season I predicted. He was pressured a ridiculous 51% of his plays last game. Losing Olafioye may be a bigger loss than I imagined it would be. But with Wally as your coach, the defence could easily be repaired and be a force by season's end. This team may be like the 2011 team that started badly but was a juggernaut by season's end. Calgary - Looked out of sorts for 3 quarters, then blew it in OT to settle for the tie. Still an excellent football team, just won't be as good as last year. Their season will be solely judged on what happens in the playoffs. And I think it may be more that Ottawa matches well against them and is in their heads rather than a regression as a whole. Edmonton - I wasn't sure if we'd get good Edm. or bad Edm. this year. The first game suggests more than just good, and if those receivers not named Bowman do all year what they did in week 1, this might be the offence all teams fear. However, losing Sherritt (any word if it is season-ending yet? Sure looked that way - EDIT: Yep, done for the year) on top of the pre-season loss of Greenwood and that LB position looks vulnerable, so they may still be a near .500 team if they can't patch that defensive hole. Winnipeg - I don't think a win in Saskatchewan means they'll do better than the 10-8 I have them pegged for, or a loss means they'll do worse. So no reason for me to change my view of them or my concerns about the defensive side of the ball yet. I shudder to think how likely it could be that they lose in Regina on Saturday (on paper they are more talented and the 'Riders did nothing to show me they are going to be strong this year, but is anyone shocked if the Bombers don't lay an egg in front of an emotional Mosaic crowd yet again, and the stadium opener will have the same feel as Labour Day I'll bet, so watch out) Saskatchewan - So Kevin Glenn looked better than I thought he might, and maybe saying 3 wins was low-balling it, but they still did lose, and did not look great for long stretches despite giving away a game they should have one if not for their crap(igna) kicker. They may be a hard-luck team in some ways this year, but I sense a mutiny both among the fans and the players if Jones gets out to an 0-3, 0-4 start, and the year will be lost early. Hamilton - Don't hurt your ankles jumping off the bandwagon, folks. One loss, and now they are going to be in the 3-15 to 6-12 range?? I don't think so folks. However, the injury bug has struck again, and that o-line gave Collaros no time far too often (and he played the short passing game too much - looked like Ricky Ray mentality for a QB who loved stretching defences with the quick long strike in the past). So maybe I'll dial back the 11-7 pick, but still think they can be the best in the east this year. Ottawa - Not sure if this is really how good the team is, or if Calgary just brings the best out of them. The rematch in Cowtown may temper people's enthusiasm about them. Not ready to give them credit for being a better than .500 team yet, but this might be the team that I have flipped my opinion by week 5 if they play more games like last week. Montreal - Played just like I suspected - not well, but got a win. And they will surprise teams early and have a better record than their play. And it will catch up to them by mid-season (that was my take before, and I'll stand by it now). If anything, I may have over-estimated Darian Durant's ability if game 1 is an indication. He did not look that good (certainly not good enough to talk trash at the Sask. bench after an undeserved win). I may have been mistaken giving them 3rd in the East. THIS JUST IN: They signed Drew Willy today, and that just reinforces how mediocre I think they are rather than improves their their roster depth. Toronto - OK, this team has driven me nuts for years in my football pool, and they continue to do so. I even joked when picking the Tabbies this weekend "Now watch Toronto do something stupid like win 38-14 and get me overconfident and believing in them going forward, then they'll lose 4 out of 5." When I think they should win, they lose, when I think they should lose, they win, and when I change my pick at the last minute to compensate for my initial thoughts which are always wrong, they go ahead and punish me for changing that pick by doing what I thought they'd do in the first place. But Mark Trestman has a way with veteran QB's and no way I thought Ray had half the game in him that he showed on Sunday. And the score should have been much, much higher but for those end zone drops, but those receivers looked really good otherwise. And no way I saw that defence performing the way they did with all those blitzes. So if I'm going to make one knee-jerk reaction and flip-flop after one game, this team would be the one to do it on. Maybe they can challenge for a playoff spot and wreck the crossover prediction I had. But I'll hold off on that until at least week 4.

Adarius Bowman

The Jets are in no way giving up on Hellebuyck yet. He has dominated at every level he has played prior to the NHL, and was thrown into the fire 2 years ago when he could have had more seasoning in the minors. The Jets don't want a new #1 to replace him, they want a veteran goalie who can be a safety valve starter for 2-3 years if Hellebuyck craps out, or who can groom Hellebuyck to be the full-time starter by year 3. And Comrie is even more highly valued in the minors, but they don't want to rush him too. So going after the same type of young goalie to become the full-time starter is pointless unless they have already decided that Hellebuyck can't cut it. So goalies like Raanta and Grubauer (and Scott Darling before them) don't fit that profile. With Fleury and Bishop off the market, in my opinion the fit the Jets want is a Steve Mason or a Brian Elliott, who can be the starter for sure if needed but won't carry a 60-65 game load, but rather split duties and play 40-45 games while "coaching" the younger goalie, and will sign shorter term rather than demand a 6 year contract with a promise of being "the guy" for the next half decade. Elliott did well in St. Louis with a lighter workload splitting time with Jake Allen (and before him Jaroslav Halak).

Your definition of "marginal player" seems largely justified by "Vegas didn't pick them so that proves their lack of value". By that logic the following players are "marginal" too since Vegas didn't pick any of them either (to name but a few): Matt Dumba, Marco Scandella, Eric Staal, Antii Raanta, Sami Vatanen, Brock Nelson, Ryan Strome, Kevin Shattenkirk, Patrick Sharp

Manny Arceneaux

I was citing TSN's Scott Cullen for that number. Actually he said 1.94/60 over the past 4 seasons, so both of our numbers may be right. But Atomic's point about sample size is fair game. Not trying to personally justify it, just trying to offer a possible rationale. I hope he is the one taken over Enstrom (he is more replaceable than a left shot defenceman).

OK, now that pre-season is done it seems more appropriate to make a guess. BC - Scary good offence this year with Chris Williams added to the receiving mix and three deadly return specialists. Jennings is the ridiculously early pick for league MOP. Could see a few 45-40 games from them. But Wally will have their defence prepared too. Bit of a gut pick but I say 13-5 and first. Calgary - Nowhere to go but down, but dropping from the summit of Everest to base camp still has you well above the clouds most days. Not sure I buy the whole "this year is about redemption for last year's Grey Cup, so we are motivated every single time out" angle. More likely they pace themselves and give up a few more games in the regular season. 13-5 but second in the division (or 12-6, see Edmonton) Edmonton - The wildcard of the West. Are they the team that ended the season strong or the one that started off poorly? What does Ed Hervey's late firing do - eliminate or create a distraction? Is Mike Reilly ready to take a run at league MOP or is he going to become labeled "the next glass QB"? Not too sure about them, guess this is my way of saying they could challenge for 1st (more likely 2nd) or could languish back in 4th in the division with a losing record, and neither outcome would surprise me. Just have a hunch they will rebound this year and be better (if not totally reflected in their win-loss record, at least in their divisional standing) 10-8 but third (or 11-7, give them one more win and Calgary one more loss) Winnipeg - Lots to be excited for as a Bomber fan, but the bar has been so low the last decade that 2 straight winning seasons qualifies for a parade in these parts at this point (which is kind of sad when you think about it). Nicholls showed he can win games (10-3 as a starter is an overlooked stat by many) but except for the division semi against BC, his passing numbers didn't jump off the page. Good game manager, and Winnipeg's run game may be the best in the CFL this year with that o-line and the Harris-Flanders combo. And that undersized receiving corps can still make plays. But about that defence ..... so we brought in two d-lineman with big sack numbers to bring more pressure - sounds like a carbon copy of last year. And Mo Leggett may be hurt to start the year, so the same problems could arise at linebacker. Hurl was not good enough 2 years ago and got bumped by Bass, why would he be an upgrade now? Bottom line, unless Richie Hall's "rush only 4 every time and bend don't break" schemes don't change, I have little hope that our overall defence will look better than last year. And don't know how Medlock can improve on last year's performance which was the difference between winning and losing in at least a half dozen games. They'll do OK, maybe be even pretty good, but the West is so stacked I think it adds up to 4th spot. Hope to be proven wrong. 10-8. Saskatchewan - If Vince Young actually made the roster and was anointed the starter, I would be waxing poetic about historic futility with this team (like 2003 Hamilton 1-17 futility), but Kevin Glenn has been around long enough to be a better regular season QB and pull a rabbit out of his hat once in a while to translate into a few more wins. And that receiving corps could keep them in a few games. However, it would require their o-line to actually give him time to throw, and his mobility is not what it used to be (not that it was ever his best feature). And too much overhaul by Chris Jones with no return on his gambles, and like Mike Kelly, the distractions will supercede the results on the field. I think the fans are already at revolt stage, how long before the players are there too? 3-15 (and that might even be charitable, but give them one win at home against Winnipeg - either the first game at the stadium opener where the fans will be jacked up or Labour Day which is always bizarro world for Winnipeg regardless of our record going in, one against Toronto, and one late in the year when the other random team is in the playoffs and doesn't care). Hamilton - Weaker than the Grey Cup caliber team of 3-4 years ago, but still the best of a soft division, and if Caollaros can shake off his injury demons, he and Austin should lead the Ticats to a comfortable 1st place division finish. Just curious, without looking can anyone actually name the back-up QB in Steeltown if (when?) Zach goes down? (looked it up - I guess Masoli is still there, with Logan Kilgore as #3). 11-7. (9 of those wins against the East) Ottawa - I really like Trevor Harris at QB, and thought the team might have actually been better with him at QB if you took Henry Burris' shoulder chip out of the equation, but his offence around him has been dismantled a bit. And lest we forget they were a losing team last year going in to the playoffs who needed a blizzard to beat the Esks and stupid play-calling by Dave Dickenson (down by 3, 2nd and goal from the 1 with one minute left and you take out Bo Levi to run a 3rd string QB option and don't hand off to Messam???? That's worse than Pete Carroll) to win the Grey Cup. Regression. 8-10. Montreal - This team is more in need of a re-build than any other, and maybe firing Popp has already kick-started it more than I am prepared to give them credit for. Plus, Darian Durant is pissed off and REALLY wants to stick it to the 'Riders for cutting him loose, so that's good for 2 wins right there. But likely not much else goes well this year in the end I fear. Wouldn't surprise me if they did a tank job by season's end and were last, but early on I think they sneak out a few surprise wins before other teams catch on and take then seriously. 7-11 (if Durant gets hurt, take 3-4 wins off that total). Toronto - Love the coaching and GM hire, but this will take time, and time is the one luxury they don't have in a market that has them ranked behind (in order) the Leafs, Jays, Raptors, NFL in general, the Bills in particular, Toronto FC, and quite possibly the Rock lacrosse team, not to mention any other cultural event like rock concerts. And Ricky Ray's first season magic is not there, even if he stays healthy. Let the annual gnashing of teeth begin about how the CFL will die without its flagship franchise being able to draw fans. 6-12. Division semi-finals: Winnipeg beats Ottawa in the crossover Calgary takes out Edmonton in a coin flip game Division finals: BC wins at home, whichever Alberta team they face, in what is the true Grey Cup calibre match. Bombers are an even money shot to become the first crossover team to go to the Grey Cup, but I don't want to sound like a homer. Leos win the cup over Wpg. or Hamilton. MOP - Jennings (BC) MOCanadian - Harris (Wpg) MOLineman - Bond (Wpg) or Lavertu (Cal) MODefensive - Eliminian (BC) MORookie - couldn't tell you right now MOSpecialTeams - Rainey or Williams (BC) Wally wins coach of the year.