TrueBlue4ever

The view from my seats: QB- Brown moved the ball and executed his sneaks well, found some receivers in coverage. Good job but low expectations going in. Prokop’s passes looked nice in flight (tight spiral, strong throws on a rope) until you saw them sail past or two feet wide of the receivers or land at their feet. Accuracy off more than a few times, tried to force the deep ball a couple of times, once off his back foot, which led to under thrown INTs. His scrambling on the TD run looked good, Streveler-esque, but his decision-making in the pocket left something to be desired. RBs - Augustine was the best Bomber on the field last at night and he should be our starter no question. Explosive, hits those holes quickly and decisively. Oliviera didn’t show anything special to me but he’ll be around. Borsa was the same as Brady, did not jump off the page. REC - Like others said, Jackson and Scheon were good, Demski is going to be a big feature of the offence this year. OL/DL - wasn’t really focussed on the lines too much, so I won’t speculate LB - Clements had some nice hits, but the Elks running backs and QB Tre Ford exposed the holes in the defence a bit DBs - Nick Hallett had a couple of nice tackles, Maruo had a really nice stick at one point, and safety Malcolm Thompson had a beautifully timed safety blitz to blow up a running play and provide the crunch of the game, one of two big hits I noticed from him. Maybe the most notable of the defence who did not really wow overall (but so many personnel changes hard for one guy to pile up the stats and stand out). Kicking - Mourtada can still pound those kickoffs which will be more important with the ball being moved back 5 yards. I don’t really worry about his punting stats because he was experimenting with that kooky Medlock Aussie rules style end over ender kick rather than trying for a spiral, but he wasn’t really that good at it and will not be kept around for his punting anyway. No field goals so the only way to judge the placekicking is the converts and he made one no problem but rang his only other attempt off the upright. Mourta-DOH! indeed. Liegghio’s kickoffs not as deep and no great hang time. I’ve seen him punt better than he did last night too. He made his convert so there is that but he didn’t really pound it through the end zone there. Mourtada has a distinct edge in leg strength but these placekicking jobs are won on accuracy, and he is still not winning people over there. Maybe the Aussie can step up. The Elks kickers were more noticeable across the board, with Hutchins especially skying punts.

Mike Riley is the last coach I remember getting carried off on the shoulders of his players instead of getting a Gatorade bath.

Tom Burgess with Mike Riley.

Attendance historically drops after Labour Day. Don’t mind the move up one month.

Neither does anyone who has already assumed him to be guilty.

Don’t mistake my comments for a condemnation of the club’s action. They can cut him for whatever reason, and they would certainly like to distance themselves from the allegations. But you ask who is judging guilt? The fans who commented “dumbass”, “good riddance”, “club cut him so he must be guilty”, “police must be checking their database in Hamilton to tie him to other crimes”, etc. I have no insight into the club’s internal investigation other than to know they got the complaint from a third party Tuesday evening and cut him a few hours later according to the paper. If they got solid proof that something criminal happened I trust they would go to the police and give their evidence. No idea if any of that happened. But it is plausible that they just didn’t want the negative press from being assocIated to it (like True North when they kept Chevy even though he was formally cleared - the public opinion was less forgiving) and he was an easy cut given training camp and three years away from the game. And anyone can speculate anything positive or negative, it is just disappointing to see comments painting him as guilty before a charge has even been laid or a statement to the police even given. And all because the media has seen fit to keep the complainant anonymous (as they frankly should given the sensitive nature of the charge) but get a quote from her but not offer the same consideration to the target of that complaint who has already had his reputation affected and been pre-judged more than a few on the board with no evidence yet given to the police and no charge even laid yet. If he is found guilty he deserves every bit of condemnation available, but if he is not guilty how does he get back his reputation? I just wish that the press would show some restraint and keep things anonymous since it so clearly has led to some to pre-judge based on an as of yet unproven (or even fully documented to the point of criminal charge) complaint. These are serious complaints and should be taken seriously for the sake of all parties, and not be the subject of the newspaper rumour mill before it has played out. As for the club, again they can cut him for whatever reason so no issue with their actions, but let’s not jump to the conclusion that the ONLY possible explanation for it is that he absolutely did it and it had nothing to do with avoiding bad PR and seeing the path of least resistance rather than suspending with pay pending the completion of the proceedings.

So who are people looking forward to specifically watching tonight? I want to see how Prokop and Brown function at QB, how Janarion Grant performs as a receiver, how Tyrell Ford looks at DB. Also want to see if Mourtada has corrected his aim with the hash mark change. Other than that just waiting to see what diamonds in the rough the scouts have uncovered.

Which is totally legal and is the problem with the rule. A player can angle his skate to deliberately deflect a puck into the net and the goal will stand, but it is the “deliberate kicking motion” that makes it illegal. And so again a judgement from the officials as to what is distinct kicking motion. If they really want to clean up the rule, make it all or nothing - a goal must go in only from a stick or deflected off an opposition player, or allow any goal off of any body part to count.

Sergio Castillo. Here for a good time, not a long time.

How about innocent until proven guilty, folks? Or even innocent until he’s at least charged? I’m all for listening to and protecting complainants, but to have your name splashed across the papers and labelled before charges are even brought is irresponsible journalism to me, seeing as how quickly some have already made up their mind.

That is a terrible non-goal call in my mind.

All the trained police standing around, and the GOP expects that teachers could handle the chaos better if they were armed. “Good guy with a gun” is a joke, unless they want to admit police are in fact bad guys with guns to maintain that myth. It is hard not to get numb to all of this. After Sandy Hook and the lack of response it became clear that any will to stop this lunacy by the people was gone, even though they were in the majority. It’s hard to try and keep caring from afar when those with a direct stake in it can’t be bothered to care enough to change things. Sad fact, for all the claims of “it’s a mental health issue, not a gun issue” that usually gets brought up, the worst mass shooting in US history (the Vegas Mandalay Bay concert shooting) still has no identifiable cause. I have talked directly to police who have read the full FBI investigation and they say the reason for the shooting has never been figured out, and likely never will be. The shooter left no note, had no known underlying mental health, psychological, or personal or financial issues that would have triggered him. Just an anonymous seemingly normal guy who had access to a massive arsenal and exploited it, and had planned out an attack like this in Chicago before settling on Vegas. Blows every excuse of the NRA out there of the water. Finally, this may be too sensitive for some and and I’m not entirely sure if this is appropriate, but it is powerful and maybe the best example I have seen of a dramatization of a school shooting, certainly on network TV. It comes from a Canadian police show called “19-2” which filmed an episode called “School”. It was originally done in French and re-done shot for shot in English a couple of years later for the Anglophone version. It has NSFW language and certainly content, but is very gripping and strongly brought home the terror and chaos of the situation for all involved. I am attaching the link here but if I do not mean to offend if anyone finds it exploitive or “glamourizing” these tragedies, not my intent. Just a reminder whenever I want to shrug and say “oh well, just another stupid day in the US, they don’t care why should I” what the human stakes are.

Will be curious to see how the salary cap increases are pared back to accommodate the increased ratification payout.

I suspect the reason the 49% rule came into play is that there was already abuse of the rule in the last CBA by Steinauer and the Tiger-Cats, because it wasn’t clear how the “naturalized American” could be used. The Cats would start a Canadian and then pull him due to “injury” and put in the qualified American and play the rest of the game with them, effectively giving them up to 20 Americans getting the starting reps. The league is already trending to pare down the number of Canadians in key roles, so it’s silly to say that the players are being selfish when they vote against something that will eventually lose them their jobs, whether or not you think the product will be better with all Americans. Is it being unselfish or you vote against your self-interest or just stupid?

Ummmmm…….

I think you vastly overestimate the profitability of the CFL.

Golden State Warriors head coach Steve Kerr made an impassioned speech saying how the majority of Americans were being held hostage by 50 senators on gun control, and it frustrated me because they are not being held hostage so long as they exercise their vote. But an article from The Atlantic offers a perspective on why it is so difficult to make a majority vote mean anything. Good read. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2022/05/senate-state-bias-filibuster-blocking-gun-control-legislation/638425/

Why are citizens allowed to buy body armour? It’s not part of the Second Amendment, and has no practical purpose for game hunting, does it?

Any team not named Tampa Bay and maybe NYR has to have some concern about their goaltending being up to playoff level requirements.

Today’s selection features two of the most under appreciated and unfairly maligned Bombers in recent memory. Both helped turn the club from a poor sister into a contender and ultimately a champion. Both also embraced the city and were true givers back to this community, both in spirit and in charitable contributions. Class people, leaders, winners, Grey Cup champions. Matt Nichols and Paul LaPolice.

Hey, that was a nice corner route Kamau ran there, I see the hands are still an issue though.

Some interesting history on the ratio rules courtesy CFL database website cfldb.ca: ”Prior to the formation of the CFL, Canadian Rugby Unions restricted the number of imports on a team to five starting in 1936. In addition, players were required to reside in Canada for one year to participate in the Grey Cup. While the rule is sometimes described as being developed to protect Canadian jobs, it was in fact implemented to develop the sport in Canada since there were no football "jobs" to have in Canada. While many factors result in todays restrictions, it is recognizing having Canadians on the rosters and starting positions is important to the continued development of football in Canada.” Roster changes over the years: CRU still controlled roster restrictions in the mid-1950’s and limited teams to 10 imports and only 8 imports allowed to play in a game. So in effect 16 Canadian starters guaranteed on offence and defence. But unlimited availability of “naturalized non-imports”, who were deemed Canadian by virtue of 5 years of residency in Canada. 1964 - active roster set at 30 players, 17 non-import and 13 import (so 11 starters have to be Canadians based on roster size), 2 man inactive roster (1 IMP, 1 NI), and NI status set as 5 years active residency in Canada or born in Canada with 13 or first 21 years spent in Canada 1965 - 32 man roster, 18 NI, 14 IMP, max 3 naturalized non-imports allowed on roster, so 10 starters would need to be Canadian. 1968 - 1 of the IMP positions becomes a designated import, can only replace another IMP who cannot re-enter the game, so now 11 starters must be NI. 1970 - the DI rule now includes QBs who can come in and out without limitation, so the dedicated back-up QB is established. 11 players will still be NI starters based on the roster numbers. 1972 - roster up to 33 players, 18 NI, 15 IMP with one of them a DI, so now minimum 10 starting NI. Another 1 NI roster spot was added in 1973 1986 - The designations switched to 19 NI, 13 IMP, and 3 QB (one QB spot dropped in 1987 and rosters down to 34). The standard make-up of the starting offence and defence at that time was American QB, RB, and 2 WR on offence with 2 SB, FB and 5 OL as Canadians (so 8 of 12 Canadian positions on offence) and a Canadian nose tackle and safety with the rest American on defence (playing a 3-4 defence usually), the remainder of the Canadians were back-ups and the kicker/punter. The Old DI rule was eliminated. 1988 - roster 36, 20 NI, 14 IMP, 2 QB, now 1 DI limited to playing special teams, so still 10 starters will be Canadian. 1990 - rosters go up by 1 QB spot to stand at 37 1993 - American based team joins the league, due to US labour laws the Canadian ratio rule cannot be implemented on those teams as the league expands through 1995. Baltimore especially takes advantage of this discrepancy to stock it’s entire starting roster and all back-ups with Americans, giving them a decided competitive edge over the Canadian squads. 2002 - significant change to ratio as rosters increase to 40 with a drop of one NI to 19 total, an increase of four IMP to 18, and 3 QB. Two of the imports are DI who can play unlimited in special teams, but can also replace another import on offence or defence. This guaranteed that no more than 16 IMP plus a (almost certainly American) QB can be starters, allowing for a minimum of 7 Canadians to be starters (a drop of 3). 2006- rosters up to 42 with 1 NI and 1 IMP added, and the number of DI spots now up to 3, Canadian starting spots still secured at 7. 2014 - rosters up to 44 with the addition of 1 NI for a total of 21 (now called Nationals, with new rules on how they are classified), and 1 IMP (now called Internationals), now up to 20. Canadian starters still at 7 because the added IMP is another DI (now 4 of them to keep starting Americans at 16, and a QB). 2019 - rosters to 45 with the addition of a Global player, who does not need to be a starter. (Americans now called Americans) 2020 - rosters to 46 with a 45 man active roster and 1 man reserve with another Global player added and a QB removed if teams want. The reserve player can be any designation, but active roster still must allow for maximum 20 Americans, minimum 21 Canadians, and minimum 2 Globals, and 2 QBs. 7 starting Canadians required, but new rule allows for up to 3 American veterans classified as Canadians (3 years with club or 4 years in CFL) to replace them if they are injured, so potentially only 4 Canadian “starters” after the first play of the game. This is the first time an American can be labelled as a Canadian based solely on league tenure and not any citizenship requirements. FYI this CBA ratification passed with only 76% approval from the players. Now the proposals have gone from no ratio at all, to the 7 Canadian starters but one re-classified American as the 8th “Canadian” starter full time, and 3 more who can replace Canadians regardless of injury or not if they play one snap less than half the game. And now the compromise which is remove the 49% rules but drop the Canadian ratio to 6 with a re-classified American as the 7th Canadian. Look at the long-term trend and you can see why Canadians might be concerned about losing their jobs, and why they might vote to reject a deal that would go against their own self-preservation. One last thought/question for those who think that the ratio should go because it is the unique rules of the CFL that make it great, not necessarily the Canadian players - if the league was entirely American players groomed on 4 down football with no Canadians or players who played a 3 down version in college, how soon before the next CBA where they vote to change all the rules to the same as the NFL, and how much resistence would any of those exclusively American players give to that change that so many traditionalists are vehemently against?

CHL also has roster rules that limit the number of imports a team can have, to keep the number of Canadians on the roster constant and to keep the grassroots development strong. MLS also has import roster rules, and specific rules to allow homegrown players a chance to make more money.

Dave Naylor explains the union vote issue here: If 90-100 players in each camp, then 800-900 total voters. Removing 400 from that vote skews things pretty drastically, and if the vast majority of those lost voters are American, then the Canadians get an over-represented voice. With rosters of 21 Canadians, 23 Americans (counting QBs) and 2 Globals, a divisive issue like ratio changing will split the vote almost 50/50, so screwing with ability to vote for Americans can make a big difference. Simoni may have a valid concern. I could imagine an equally insensitive Canadian player’s response to you being: “All of the player concessions fall Sole(l)y at the feet of the Canadians...we have already lost one of our guaranteed 7 starting spots to the “veteran American” (and it used to be 12 Canadians, then 11)...now you want our reps cut down which will soon lead to full-time loss of the spot and only 4 Canadians per team…....prove your own worth by making the starting 24 and stop crying. Canadians have been the backbone of this league and the reason inferior Americans who can’t make the NFL have another option to play football and get a second look, and paid in many instances when they would have no career option...if there is no ratio many a Canadian player who is better like an Andrew Harris never even gets a fair chance to compete from the start due to being ousted by a far cheaper American who had the advantage of a big shiny US College program ..yes it's the CFL and nationality which is what the league was founded on should not be compromised so that a few top Americans can be paid more and create a greater divide between the top and bottom money-makers on a team and divide a locker room even further by creating a rich and poor class system...I can tell you first hand many a great American player had the opportunity to come here as he has had NFL coaches in his ear telling him to not waste his time in the league cause he gonna be cut for not being big enough, fast enough, tall enough, mature enough, doesn’t fit the NFL model enough (see Willie Jefferson for one) until he gets a solid look here, performs, and then the League gets past its biases and takes a second look, all because the CFL was there to showcase him (see Doug Flutie and Cameron Wake for two more)…..this is facts You still will require 20 Americans plus QBs plus two more designated imports..suck it up..prove your worth rather than demanding less Canadians get jobs in their home country and being indignant when they choose to vote no to sacrificing their own jobs for you..if it's mainly the Canadians balking at the 49% thing it’s because it’s just another step towards eliminating Canadians all together and wiping out any sense of”Canadian” in the CFL..and alienating the Canadian fan base by having American league with American rules and American players without guys who are home town heroes who put butts in seats and have their merchandise fly off shelves (Harris and Demski probably moved more jerseys than Zach Collaros)……if Americans don’t want to play up in Canada as immigrants taking jobs from Canadians (funny when the MAGA war cry is on the other foot, isn’t it?) they can go play in the XFL, USFL, arena league, or whatever other US spring league has been created this year and watch it fold in a year or two while their player paycheques bounce again and again, or they can come up here and earn their spot in the most-tenured football league in North America and only stable viable option to the NFL to keep their football dream alive, or they can go work at Walmart with their 4 year college football scholarship degree, or they can eat a bag...” Not so sure the fans have been truly united. Majority of the vocal folks seemed to be firmly in the players’ corner and did not like the ratio changes in the first offer, but now that the Canadian players are pushing back at voting themselves out of a job, the vocal public is now casting them as the villains because it might delay the season. And we need to be careful about the utility of “tapping the pulse of the fan base”. The CFL would probably prefer to tap the pulse of the non-fan to see what would make them a fan rather than catering to the established fan who is not likely to go anywhere anyway, even if Canadians are eliminated (as the flip-flop on the ratio stance would seem to indicate).

Khari Jones.