TrueBlue4ever

I think the idea is that his points per 60 minutes average is 1.96, which is the same as Nicolaj Ehlers and Joe Pavelski. He just gets put on the bottom line with a Thorburn and a Copp for 6-7 minutes max. a night and therefore doesn't get the points that come with bigger minutes. That's the theory anyway. Not saying I buy it myself (if he is that good wouldn't they move him up?) but that I suspect is the rationale from those who think he's a untapped gem.

Care to revise your statement, sir?

Someone had to start this one. And I suck at posting gifs, so I hope this works. 2017 Blue Bomber home season is upon us! IGF repairs are done and the rum hut is open for business. And one can only assume that do or die has re-stocked his gin supply for odds and sods this year

Question: Why has no one snapped up Bear Woods yet?

Global news is reporting that Quincey MacDuffie got released by the Dallas Cowboys.

Because they have to play twice during the "special week" in week 5 where the league plays 5 games to accommodate an 81 game schedule. They have to play on the road Friday (in the West no less), then the following Wednesday at home, then the following Monday on the road, before their first bye. I'd rather have 2 byes (even if one is in week 1 or 20) than have 3 games in 3 cities in 11 days. They even get screwed by having week 20 as one of their 3 byes.

In global politics: the Soviet Union (with Gorbachev in charge) and Yugoslavia both still existed, East Germany had only ceased to exist one month earlier. Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Namibia did not exist as independent countries. The last U.S. war fought was Vietnam. In the NHL, Mario Lemieux had not yet won a Stanley Cup, the Minnesota North Stars still existed, the San Jose Sharks did not, and Ottawa and Tampa Bay had not yet even been awarded franchises. Teemu Selanne was still 2 years away from playing a game with the Jets, and Guy Lafleur was still playing pro hockey. Laval was still 6 years away from having a football program, and they have 9 more titles than the Bombers do since 1990. More Super Bowls have been played since the last Bomber Grey Cup win than before it. Troy Westwood had not yet kicked a field goal in the CFL. The Sacramento Gold Miners did not yet exist. Nor did John Candy or Wayne Gretzky as CFL owners. Only 8 players in the NFL made over $2 million a season, and a CFL player would still make more than an NFL player the year after the Bombers last won the Cup. Magic Johnson was still playing basketball. Bo Jackson was still playing football. Ken Griffey was still playing baseball - that's Ken Griffey Sr. So was Dave Parker. Sugar Ray Leonard was still boxing. Pete Rose was still eligible to be elected into the Hall of Fame. Buffalo had never played in a Super Bowl. Freddie Mercury was still alive. So was Dr. Suess. And Red Grange. Also, Redd Foxx, George Gobel, and Frank Capra. MIke Trout had not been born yet. Neither had Milos Raonic. Cassette tapes outsold compact discs by 50%. Gas was 39.9 cents a litre. Closed captioning, internet cafes (or even the world wide web), Terminator 2, Nirvana (outside of Seattle), and Super Nintendo did not exist yet. Home Alone was the #1 movie in America. Macauley Culkin is now 36 years old, by the way. Anyone else feeling old yet?

In the grand scheme it doesn't really matter if O' Shea was named or not, since if he couldn't beat out Dickenson for the West nod, he wasn't going to beat him out league-wide at the end of the day. However, I'd like to see the awards do the same as COY used to do and name 3 finalists. If you want to keep a West and an East rep, fine, but add a 3rd body. MOP should be Mitchell vs Reilly (and imagine no East rep and add Adarus Bowman - teammates going for the MOP), Defensive MOP could certainly have added Leggett, Shimoni Lawrence, or Adam Bighill to the mix, Andrew Harris to MO Canadian, Sorenson from Edm or Spencer Wilson from Calgary for lineman, and Grant Shaw and his FG percentage or McDuffie and his two kickoff return TDs could add to special teams POY. And Loffler of course to the rookie mix, since defensive player vs offensive receiver is a more interesting debate than receiver vs lineman.

You mean like you did for the ourbombers.com site?

Care to make it interesting? I'll bet you $1000 bucks the Bombers beat BC. I'll even give you 5:1 odds, since I'm such a nice guy. :-) I feel really confident in this bet, since I read the 2016 version of this:

That's a Mickey Mouse call too (maybe moreso because the teams weren't even "set"). If they are going to call it, then be consistent. I see the centre moving the ball around a lot on all teams on many snaps, and it never gets called. And I'm not sure how this creates an unfair advantage for the offensive team pre-snap. If it is the rule, then call it, but call it all the time ,and players will adjust. But to call it once in a blue moon, and with a key third and inches coming up where gripping the ball pre-snap would seem to be normal, seems really ticky-tack to me (yes, even if it is against the 'Riders),

I didn't say it wasn't an incorrect call, following the letter of the rules. I said it was a mickey mouse call. Cheap. That kind of pre-snap movement happens so often and is let go, and they call it on 3rd and inches in the 4th quarter of a one score game? By the letter of the law, there is no contact allowed after 5 yards for receivers and DBs. Following the letter of the law, there should be 15-20 illegal contact fouls called every game, and called on receivers as much as DBs, yet now they allow "hand-fighting" (sometimes). It is a penalty for an o-lineman to hold, yet it is said that there is holding on every play. So why no flag on every play. Because refs should know that the "flow" of the game is key too. Other sports (rugby, soccer) will "play the advantage" on a foul and let the play go if it isn't an egregious foul that changes the entire set up of the play. Football allows that too. The timing and interpretation of that call was ridiculous, the QB would still had to have taken the snap and got past the first down marker, not sure how having the ball a millimetre forward (if it was) changes that scenario and gives the Ticats an unfair advantage.

Wow, 3rd and inches and they call Hamilton on illegal procedure because the centre tips the ball up before the snap. That is the most mickey mouse call I have ever seen in 35+ years of attaching football.

No long diatribe on the happy honker today, but would nominate Burnett for that hit that forced the fumble that Bass ran in. Runner-up could be Smith for that great simultaneous catch. But since this is a loss, almost feel like I should name an anti-Happy Honker (Terrible Tooter??, Brutal Blower??? Hapless Honker???), and no doubt it goes to Johnny Adams for his "oh-lay" arm wave on that fumble. Jump on the ball, don't play patty cake with it! Cost us 3 (very valuable, as it turned out) points. And for all those who say too many FGs and not enough TDs, Calgary won because of their 5 FGs today.

The more I watch Hamilton's secondary and Ottawa in general, the more I want us to tank and get 4th place so we can waltz into the grey Cup on a crossover.

Why do I see this popping up in a future thread about "you're not a true fan if....." New benchmark for true fandom set. Better get on it, 17 and Noeller. Perhaps a day trip to Kansas to expedite the process. Or are you not true fans???????

Based on winning percentage, that 16-2 mark is only 5th best all-time: Calgary Stampeders 1.000 (12-0-0) (1948) Calgary Stampeders .929 (13-1-0) (1949) Ottawa Rough Riders .917 (11-1-0) (1949) Edmonton Eskimos .906 (14-1-1) (1981) Edmonton Eskimos .889 (16-2-0) (1989) That '48-'49 Calgary dynasty also won 22 games in a row over those 2 seasons. And, fun fact, Calgary has won 15 games in a season 4 times in their history, but 3 of those times did not win the Grey Cup.

Now that I'm out, a modest proposal in 3 parts for next year for this contest: 1. No eliminations, just accrue points for the entire year 2. 2 points if your selected player gets a TD, 1 point if he only gets a 2 point convert, 0 points if he does not score 3. No repeating players, and you have to pick from each CFL squad at least once during the year (seeing Messam every week is getting kind of dull, especially when we get down to less than 10 people and everybody picks him).

60 seconds. But I'm not being timed here. (And just beating everyone to the punch, nor am I being paid by the word). I do speak professionally for a living, however. No joke.

And this is exactly why I say a loss here is not so vital. I get that beating Calgary now will give the Bombers the belief that "we CAN beat these guys" (Calgary's players in 2001 pointed to the final regular season game in Winnipeg where they won to sneak into the playoffs as the springboard game that gave them confidence that they could compete with the big dogs), but let's face it, the 2001 Bombers lost that Grey Cup because they spent the week "sizing rings for their fingers" as many players on both sides of the ball later admitted - we lost that game due to overconfidence. So let Calgary have all the cockiness in the world. I doubt a win by us this weekend will put much fear into them, since they have already beaten us twice by 2 touchdowns each game, and the scores were not even truly reflective of how dominant they were both times. Ah, I hear you saying "But this is a different team. They haven't faced us with Matt Nicholls at quarterback!" Just stop for a second, metaphorically remove yourself from the Province of Manitoba for the moment, and re-read that second sentence out loud. Full respect to Nicholls and the job he has done managing the team through this 7 game run, but does that phrase really strike fear into the hearts of the inhabitants of Cowtown, or anyone else outside the 204? As an analogy, Carson Palmer may be a very good QB who can rattle off 7 straight wins with the Arizona Cardinals, but Tom Brady is not going to be intimidated because Palmer is now playing in place of Kurt Warner. There are ways to beat this Calgary team for sure, but if both teams are playing their best football at the same time on game day and make minimal mistakes, then Calgary is handsomely favoured in that scenario, and should be. I like our odds better flying under the radar, walking in there in November (which, as I said before, is a fairly solid lock for where the West Final is going to be played this year, even if we win this weekend, given that they get all East teams in the final 5 weeks, including 2 against Montreal), catching them on 3 weeks rest and with having played no meaningful football for the better part of a month and a half (I'm calling it now, Stampeders will have enough points to clinch first in the West by week 16), with bad weather possibly playing a part in shutting down their high-octane offense (Calgary in late November, odds are decent that is the case), and maybe they are fat, sassy and dozing while we are battle-tested, riding momentum, and scrappy after fighting BC for 2nd place down the stretch, with a playoff win under our belts in the West semi. That scenario has not been infrequent for Calgary teams in the past. Not trying to bash the Bombers, cheering madly for a win, especially to solidify a run at second place and a home playoff date, and to keep the (pipe?)dream of first in the West alive, but cheer with the heart and bet with the head is the winning formula, and I'm not pushing all my chips in with the Blue and Gold this weekend, that bet is best saved when we are the final 2 at the table.

If you compare these teams on paper, not sure how well we match up. Offensively they have us beat in every area. Defensively, maybe closer, but other than interceptions, most stats are in Calgary's favour or even. And what they lose in INTs (22 for us vs. 7 for them) they make up for in pass knockdowns (35 for us vs. 53 for them). Special teams are actually a saw-off, for as brilliant as Medlock has been, Parades has been just as good if not a touch better. Their punting and kickoffs are better, our coverage is better. The great unknown, and the hardest thing to predict which affects the vast majority of game outcomes, is turnovers. So we have a shot there, but Calgary just doesn't turn the ball over (#1 in the league, we are the only team close to them), so the very thing the Bombers have relied upon the most in this streak may not be available to us given how well they protect the ball. And Calgary is undefeated at home and win by an average of 15 points there. The best bet is pressure on Mitchell (his completion rate drops 31% when pressured) but that o-line is easily the best in the CFL, fewest sacks allowed (13 in 12 games, 10 fewer than the next best and less than half the league average). So can we win? Of course, any given Sunday, etc. etc. And intangibles probably favour the Bombers (upstart team still feeling disrespected). But I say odds are long here. AND THAT'S OK - here's why. This is not the game to win, because Calgary gets it's final 5 games against the East and will likely finish first in the West anyway, even if we beat them this week. But they have the bye in week 20, followed by the bye for the west semi-final if they are first, so that's a 3 week layoff (plus they could have first place wrapped up by week 16, so they would be in cruise mode for almost all of October) and if past Calgary teams are any harbinger, they plow through the regular season, and then stumble in the playoffs at home when rested or against a weaker opponent (2013, 2012, 2010, 2005). That may be our best road to glory (barring a tank job to finish 4th and get a crossover).

Crap, I knew that too! Got lost in my processing. And maybe all of my Medlock love blinded me. I'll edit that. Sorry all. And thanks to the MBB fact-checkers and copy editors for catching that. The Regina Leader-Post may be hiring and you'd be a good fit.

OK, the second segment of 6 games is now done, so who are the contenders for the Shaw CFL Awards (Schenley Award was so much cooler sounding back in the day) from the Bombers? One poster's suggestions below, happy to hear other opinions. Most Outstanding Player - The whole team has been clicking, with no real dominant performances that have carried the team repeatedly a la Milt Stegall, and different players stepping up each game. And since there is an award for defence and special teams, kind of default to offence here. I would say Andrew Harris, who was leading the league in rushing before missing the last game, but could Justin Medlock actually challenge for this award, given how clutch he has been and how many wins would be losses without his accuracy? And Weston Dressler may have something to say about this by year's end. (Most Valuable Player) - Not an official award, but maybe more appropriate for this team given that we have no dominant stats guys like a Mike Reilly, Bo Levi Mitchell, Adarius Bowman, etc. Again, Medlock has been vital to our success in close games, but can anyone deny that, pedestrian stats or not, Matt Nicholls has clearly turned this season around for us and has this offence (and defence) inspired with his fire and drive? 7-0 as a starter clinches it for me. Most Outstanding Defensive Player - Ian Wild has been a tackling machine, and Taylor Loffler brings a physical element to the safety position that has been missing. In fact, after I finished this write-up I went back and looked at Khalil Bass' stats and realized what a "quietly" outstanding season he has had (55 tackles, 3 sacks, 2 INTs, 2 forced fumbles and 1 fumble recovery), and he may be the most underrated player on that defence. But I will take Maurice Leggett for his league leading 6 interceptions from the linebacker spot. Most Outstanding Special Teams Player - With all due respect to Quincy McDuffie and Kevin "are you kidding me, another flag?" Fogg, it is Justin Medlock hands down. Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman - I have no special insight into this position, so happy to be corrected here by someone in the know, but the o-line seems to have been resurrected into a force since Travis Bond got in there. Most Outstanding Canadian - Jamaal Westerman's team leading 5 sacks put him in the running, and Taylor Loffler's overall "presence" scores him some points, but this is down to Andrew Harris. The offence was intended to be built around Harris' skill set, so the glamour position is hard to ignore. We'll see if the injury changes this outlook. (Yes, I edited this because I am an idiot and assumed kickers are Canadian for a split second. That's a paddlin' coming my way.) Most Outstanding Rookie - OK, I can't keep making Taylor Loffler second best in every category, can I? Well...... In this corner, you have Loffler's 1 sack, 2 INT's, 1 forced fumble, 5 special teams tackles, and 27 tackles (and it feels like each one of them caused an injury to an opponent), and beyond that, how many receivers hear footsteps and bail out on tough catches when he is near? But in the other corner, Kevin Fogg has 3 INT's and 1 sack, plus an astounding 58 tackles (2 off of Wild's club lead), not counting his 1 special teams tackle, plus 1 forced fumble and 1 fumble recovery. Fogg did have that one monster game in Toronto that may give me a bias, and Loffler's passport should not be discounted, but the tie breaker for me is Fogg's punt return work. He is fourth overall with 489 return yards, has a ridiculous 15.3 yard return average (second only to Chris Rainey in BC) and if his 3 TDs hadn't been called back by penalties (2 of which, and arguably all 3 had zero bearing on his returns given that he had already beaten the coverage and was clear to the end zone before the flags were thrown) he'd be leading the league in return TD's and likely return average. It's Kevin Fogg for me, and I don't think it's that razor thin a victory. Now light up the torches and bring the pitchforks.