TrueBlue4ever

Wow, just wow! That’s like OJ saying: “If you throw out that one night when Ron Goldman unexpectedly interrupted me, I’m way down on my spousal assaults against Nicole this year.” Given Dockenson’s responses here, I think the Saskatchewan BOG needs to step in and send a message from the top before the league investigates the entire culture there. Like Florida did with Quenneville. But with the Cup in Regina this season and a team still in the hunt, I don’t see a thing happening until they are eliminated from contention. At best there will be an off-season reckoning…..not that I would hold my breath waiting for it.

Nope. But they have done that for this year in the 3rd jersey scheme.

Ok, let’s go down this rabbit hole for just a second. McDonald’s (or Tim’s, or Safeway, etc.) runs a contest to help boost their product sales (Monopoly, Roll Up the Rim), and they falsely promise prizes that they would be on the hook for. They can do it because they control all the aspects of the contest. What products they want to sell that they attach the contest to, the odds of winning, which product holds the winning “ticket”. They control it all, so they are the only ones who can game the system. No issue that this could be manipulated and has been in the past. Now compare that to the situation you are proposing. The company puts up the contest in exchange for advertising time on a major TV network. They are on the hook for the prize money. But they have no actual control over when or even if the prize is given out. They are waiting on an external event (2 KO returns in the same game) that is beyond their control. All they can determine is the statistical odds of it paying out, and if the insurance they pay to cover the prize money is worth the increase in revenue the advertising boost gives them. So for them to have the ability to cheat the system, they would need an outside partner (in this case, the CFL) to rig the system independently to ensure the payout never happens. And even then, there is no guarantee that the phantom flag could be thrown without some 100% certainty that a marginal block happens on every return (like the “known fact” that holding happens on the o-line on every year snap even if not flagged) to allow for the opportunity for a flag to be thrown without it being totally obvious that it was WWE-style fakery. And then the professional league would have to agree to go along with it. That this one sponsor is so valuable that they are willing to risk the entire integrity and livelihood of the sport for the revenue they get from that sponsor in return. Oh, and let’s also remember that the newest (and apparently most profitable) league sponsor is a gaming site that gives each team $2.5 million in extra revenue a year. Just how would they feel knowing that a rival sponsor is forcing the league to fraudulently fix the outcome of games and putting the credibility of their gaming site into question? And that the CFL is totally on board with doing this, screwing them and every fan of the league over and illegally match-fixing for the sake of that other sponsor, all because they don’t want their sponsor to pay what is likely at most a $10,000 insurance premium for a company owned by a guy worth $10 billion dollars? THAT’S the scenario you think is possible? Just take a moment to really think about how implausible this kind of 3rd party tampering is, and how little it would be worth to actually go through with it for the dollars involved.

Of all the anti-CFL rants and conspiracy theories you have levied against the BOG, TSN, Ambrosie, etc. in recent times, this one really takes the cake. Corporate sponsor Save On Foods runs the contest and they are the ones who pay out, just like they did when Laine scored 5 goals in a game. The league HQ, BOG, and the officials have nothing to do with it.

Go to the tweet. Bottom right under the tweet is an upward arrow coming out of a box. Click on it. It should give you the option to “Copy link”. Copy, then come here and paste directly into the message body (do NOT use the “insert image from URL” box). Once it is pasted it should automatically show.

I’m just curious to see who Bigblue204 ultimately picked.

I sometimes think we overlook and take for granted how important Joe Pascucci’s impact is on the Blue Bomber legacy. Saved up all the old archival tapes from his time at Global (then CKND) and gives us a living history of the Bombers (and Jets) that otherwise would have been lost to the dustbin of time. Big shout out to him for seeing the value in the old footage and keeping the memories alive. And the best part of that video was the newspaper headline shown at the end. 🤣

I think you are now fixating on the fly sweeps that Dressler and Demski ran as a comparable, which Whitehead also did with a good bit of success. But remember that D and D also ran deep patterns and converted with more success than Lucky did. The goal was to get the ball into Lucky’s hands and let his quick acceleration make people miss. Making him a punt returner and giving him quick easy short passes have him the touches to exploit his skills, because he was not succeeding at getting the ball in his hands consistently on the mid or long range plays. In theory, Janarion Grant should be the same “kind of player” as Whitehead - great early acceleration and vision to find holes in traffic from a smaller player who could be a deep threat given his speed. But we haven’t seen him morph into anything other than a jet sweep option, so is Buck Pierce mis-using him or does he just not have the skill set (yet?) to be that kind of player? Maybe there is more to bring a deep threat than just sprinting down the field faster than everyone else on every play. Lucky would seem to agree given his comments about how he needed to learn route running. He did not have it in his first year with the Bombers, O’Shea chose to bench him in favour of a more gritty Bailey, and Walters opted not to re-sign him.

That’s the thing about the “eye test” from games 3 years ago, it will be just as (if not more) deceiving than the raw data, even if those numbers can be “spun”. I remember Ed Tait commenting that for all his speed, Lucky did not get much separation from defenders on downfield routes. But everyone will remember more that which feeds their confirmation bias (like when you buy a new car and suddenly it seems like there are tons like yours when before you never saw any - they were always there, but your mind was not focussed on looking or them). If you think LaPo muzzled him, all you will remember is nothing but hitch screens and Nichols bad aim, when Lucky himself admitted that it took the 2020 year off for him to learn how to run better routes and transform his game. I just provided some statistical data about how many long targets he had and how ineffective he was at converting them as a counterpoint to the idea that LaPo “refused to use him past the line of scrimmage”.

Lucky had 75 targets in 2019, and a staggering amount of them were tosses behind the line of scrimmage (30, with 27 being completed). Another 19 targets were at 7 yards or less (16 completions). LaPo definitely overused the hitch screen to him to the point that teams would sit on it. Having said that, Lucky was unreliable in the longer pass game, and some of the abandonment of him there was due to his lack of success as much as it was just being a decoy. Of 26 targets thrown his way at 8 yards or more downfield, he caught only 9 of them (34.6% conversion rate) and only 1 of 9 targets over 20 yards with 1 TD and 2 of those intercepted (for some context, same year Darvin Adams caught 8 of 20 targets over 20 yards for 2 TDs with one of those being intercepted, but had an additional target where he drew a PI call). So the overall picture is a bit more complex than what is being presented. And Lucky and Brandon Alexander both noted how hard he worked in mini-camps during the 2020 pandemic to improve his route running and how much he improved at becoming a deep threat because of it. So criticism can be spread out between LaPo’s over-reliance on hitch plays to get the ball into his hands, Lucky’s own inability to improve his game beyond that type of play, the Bomber receivers coach for not honing that skill more in 2019, O’Shea for benching him in favour of Bailey instead of letting him develop, and Walters for not re-upping him and giving him another chance.

I’ll pick Rourke, root for a Bomber shutout, and be out of my misery.

If it worked this time that’s a big huzzah in my books. Maybe between your boisterous curses, Tracker’s voodoo rituals, and my silent incantations we can sway the football gods some more!

Appreciate that, but with those abilities where the hell were you during the 29 year drought making us all suffer? Hack! 😁

That is how I viewed the play exactly. That’s where an official explanation of “surviving contact” (if that is even part of the rule for possession and “down by contact”) would have been so helpful during the broadcast to determine what the review booth is looking for.

That play is a lot closer for sure. I did not see definitive evidence the ball hit the turf between Banks’ knees (no obvious bounce up or change of direction - not like the turf pebbles that came up in the West Final non-catch) but it is possible, I didn’t think there was a clear angle either way, but my initial reaction was “wow, Banks did not drop it” and I saw nothing on review to make me say that was a wrong first assumption. Again, it is subjective and I think the biggest debate is of Houston is down by contact the second he hits the ground or if he is required to “survive contact” to complete the play. That kind of interpretation is what would make a ref in the TV booth a good add to provide insight. I suspect some would still say the ref was wrong since they are likely to back up the call on the field almost every time.

Winnipeg 16:10 Toronto 13:50 according to the CFL game tracker.

If you are referring to the 1:05 mark in the video, just after Banks’ sock lifts up, that is Houston’s arm with white tape on it, not the football. Unless you mean a different angle, in which case I will look again.

Here is the link to the video replay from TSN. Best view is at the 2:00 mark. If you can’t open the link here then go to TSN and look for the “Must See video” of the catch. His right hand and left arm are under the ball to my eye and it never hits the turf. But if I can’t convince you of that point which seems the least contentious of the whole play (which seems to be pretty clear unless you are looking for a reason to blame the refs), then there is no point in arguing the “surviving contact” portion of the play or if the top of the ball touches when Banks squeezes it between his legs. If the play is dead the moment he is down by contact, it should be an INT. If “surviving contact” is allowed to be factored in to the play, then it is properly upheld as a TD. I have not gone to referee school so I can’t speak to the nuance of the rule. In the end, I agree that a referee on the booth to explain the rules would be great, but that will hardly settle the issue. Trying to convince some fans that the refs aren’t all biased against their team and that the commentators are all rooting for the opponent of your team every time is like trying to convince the tide to stop from coming in to shore, so an explanation from on high will not convince some that it is still the wrong decision. But refs are human and for every contested TD catch there will be a contested 3rd down spot of the ball that goes for your team, but which you will explain away because it serves your interest as a fan. So we’ll all have to agree to disagree on this call, like so many others. As for the commentators rooting for Toronto, they are in the business of selling a story, selling excitement, so they will cheer on an underdog or a comeback, not because they hate your team but because they want to keep the audience engaged and invested until the clock hits zero. Again probably not a popular take for many who have expressed their consistent disdain for the TSN broadcast. But I’m pretty confident Rod Smith and Duane Ford don’t care who wins or loses, nor do the refs unless they are betting on the outcome (and I don’t think an Argo-Bomber game is seeing such action as to make it worth the effort). But fans will fan, so to each their own. And I can only speak for myself, but I suppose I have reached the age where I realize that yelling at the TV is never going to change the call, whether that makes me less of a fan or just closer to a Zen state of enlightenment is for others to decide. Namaste. https://www.tsn.ca/Must-See/video/must-see-banks-incredible-52-yard-td-grab~2477796

Not getting any at home? Maybe Viagra would help. 🤣

Not sure they do, but I’ll take it.

Was just about to say that dropped pick 6 by Lawson may have cost us the game. But Bede’s shank saves us……maybe. Will relax when the clock is at zeros.

Toronto running the same hitch plays the Bombers are. Just better. Maybe it’s not the play call so much as it is the execution.

Because with the pay raise to Collaros and keeping both Jeffs and Biggie on D we couldn’t afford everyone, and why give up on Brady O for a 35 year old who had injury issues? This was in part a “long term” move. We can more fairly judge at season’s end of Harris plays all 18 games.

To my eye Banks was bobbling the ball before the hit. But they all count the same. And credit Rose for the follow through which did not allow him to re-gain control. The lateral was the real beauty part of that play.