BigBlue

We don't have to sign Glenn as a backup ... if Nichols goes down we can always trade for him again

Are the Blue Bombers the Rodney Dangerfield of the CFL? I have seen two dominant times for our beloved Bombers ... The Bud Grant era and the 1980s ending with Mike Riley. The rest of our history in my lifetime has seemed spotty with an occasional Grey Cup trip here and there. We can't exactly say we have burned up the league in this last decade but still I don't think we get the slightest amount of respect from around the league in terms of either fans or media. I just read the who will dominate the league piece (http://www.cfl.ca/2016/12/27/forward-thinking-whos-in-position-to-dominate-2017/) and wanted to barf. It's the same kind of drivel I expect from Eastern reporters and TSN. It seems to me at halftime if the bombers are leading a televised game TSN doesn't even get around to doing an analysis of the first half... they will do an anticipation item hiliting the game coming up in the second part of a doubleheader or pursue some other flight of fancy about a unique individual in the game who wasn't even playing that day. Not always, but no kidding either: there is no need to sing Bomber praises. When I talk to strangers and acquaintances as I travel around our great country, I don't hear any sense of respect about our football club either. "I hear the Bombers bombed again" as the most usual comment. The basement dwelling NY Mets carry more interest to them than our Blue and how come I don'y know the stats on the Regina Pats. While I'm in the bellyaching mode there is one more thing that really bothers me. It didn't use to as much but now it just feels real. That's some of the officiating crews who come here to referee. Do they think they are in Backdoorsville in Podunk Canada with nothing to do but visit our zoo? (I hear we have upgraded that place but now it costs $25 just to get in.) I don't think for one minute that the CFL powers that be would actually tell a crew to favour one team over another although there are days when I wonder. Rather it seems to me that some of the refs just look down their nose at us and as a result call the game with undue bias. I used to think I was nuts to think the refereeing was anything but fair. Now I feel like a crodgity old koot howling at the moon #$#!@#$%^ How wrong am I? And can MOS get us to a first place finish? Finally?

Well this is the slowest I have seen our site in a cuple of years ... hope that is a good sign

To me the Nichols acquisition is not unlike when we acquired Tom Burgess from the Riders ... in both cases we had a desperate QB situation and we ended up with a good not great QB

Should .... shouldn't.... spoken like a true socialist

I am only referring to compensation for a draft pick National of 3 or 4 years or less playing in the league

what is "best player available" any way? unless there is a superstar in waiting who is not NFL bound the whole concept seems nebulous and murky

the three year number is skewed by the giant number of players that only play one or perhaps two years ... that would put the core veterans at four five or six years. Taking a "median" number would not show that any better than an "average" number. A better picture would be to see what the average career length of a player who has made it past year two. The numbers above simply reflect a high turnover rate of lower paid players.

Yes it would help to have some form of compensation such as an equal or better draft pick than the leaving player's own draft level. What might help even better is a draft pick based on the salary level of the leaving player, for example: 125+ k$ .... 1st round pick next draft 100-124k $ ... 2nd round 90-100 k ... 3rd round < 90 k ... 4th round

I am hoping its not true but I don't have evidence contrawise ... else we would not have let a developing prospect like Bennett go ... either that or our QB recruiting skills has been/still is a massive failure to date

Ranting and raving without the thought process engaged ... the reason has been clearly outlined .... and a reward of only two points for 40 or 50 yards of field position is not enough of a reward for all that good work ... earn your way out of a hole

The revolving door of US players is what I would like to see end .... look at most rosters compared to 3 or 4 years ago: very few teams look a lot like they used to be ... TRUE that career ending injuries take their toll ... but the facts of life seem to be that the Intl rookies put a lot of pressure on the other average players - - economics you know Keeping the same players on the same club has fan appeal for me and builds player identity for some few of us ... the opposite is the gong show Jones is attempting to run in Regina

I hope one of our first rounders is a receiver .... I don't care whether our first overall is an offensive or defensive lineman ... as long as we pick the opposite side of the ball with our second round pick

day at 08:16 PM · "Why remove a strategic coaching decision from the game?" When you are kicking out of your own endzone into a breeze there is not much strategy to taking a safety, just sanity in giving up just two points to put the other team on their 40 instead of our 40 yard line. Let good defense and special teams play have its reward and not be bought off...

My guess is that we need to use the full court press in signing Nichols ... if the best deal possible doesn't get him signed shortly, then we will know what to do... we will know which other QBs to go after and with how much .... I am happy enough with Nichols-Glenn .... when we let Brian Bennett get away I realized we are in short term thinking mode (no incubating a Reilly, Jennings or Levi-Mitchell type) ... we will always have average QBs if we have to acquire our starter from another club UNLESS we are prepared to make a Matt Dunigan splurge again and that hasn't happened in two decades .... it would not surprise me to see Bennett the Roughies' ordained starter before the season is over ... I fear our QB plan has a major fault

Its seems all the concessions in negotiations have gone the players way ... I don't remember seeing much that went the leagues way .... maybe its time for a bit of a shift and to me protecting draftees is one key the clubs need

The Canadian draft process is critical to building long term club success ... yet the trend is to sign for 2 or 3 years and then test the market ... the draft investment can vanish all too quickly ... I would like to see a restricted free agent clause implemented similar to hockey's ... of course that means a change in the collective bargaining agreement for the players' association ... But what real power does the association have over the league? If the players knew the clubs would go with all American replacement players in the case negotiations could not be concluded by season's start, then their power might weaken mightily. Nobody wants to test those waters but the only way to negotiate anything is to have at least one viable alternative ... having two or three alternatives is even better. I am now reading that some players contracts have an NFL tryout clause. I actually think that is an ok idea that may increase the quality of our overall International talent pool. Give the players a 3 month window every year to tryout and sign with a NFL club ... say they have from January to March to sign a NFL contract, and if they do, but subsequently fail to make "the Bigs", then they by default return to their CFL contract ... of course they can still go the free agency route as now ... BUT both sides might prefer to have the comfort of a good contract for the long term without the anxiety, time and pain staking negotiating process of reaching a new uncertain contract, be it better, worse or similar. A CFL agreement could even be reached with NFL if that helps, but it does not seem to be required. IF NFL tryouts become part of a standard clause in the general CFL contract, players could play their hearts out for their CFL club at all times during our season, test the NFL waters each winter if they wish, and failing real success, have the predictability to easily and seamlessly return to their original CFL club, and play in the latter and most critical part of the CFL season. Sounds kind of win-win, GM's can plan better and get players to sign longer term and with it more lucrative contracts. At the same time the GM knows he is doing their very best for each of their players and in no wise is holding them back. Fear and hidden agendas disappear and good faith and cooperation can blossom. Its professional and "feel good" for all involved... And it brings stability and allows long term planning instead of everything short term and stop-gap-ish. Perhaps in negotiations with the players association, the restricted free agent clause can be traded for a standard NFL tryout clause. I think it would help all concerned.

Future contracts (for the next 2 or 3 years or more) are for past work already accomplished. They reward past value not future value. Contracts after the one already signed is what will reward what gets done in the forseeable future and right now.... just so long as that is perfectly clear

Again, I believe it is possible to sign our number one overall pick before actually drafting him ... is this not correct? .... might not that save some ST JOHN anxiety....

"Laval’s Antony Auclair, who jumped eight spots from No. 10 on the list to second overall.The 6-foot-5, 254-pound tight end was a part of the Rouge et Or squad that won the Vanier Cup in Hamilton in late November over the Calgary Dinos. In the championship game, Auclair recorded six receptions, including a touchdown, and accumulated 70 yards." TE Auclair might be more interesting to me than a lineman with our number one, that is if he is not NFL drafted. If he is then maybe using a 6th or 7th round pick might be more appropriate. I see there is a receiver from Saskatchewan in the top 20: lets not draft him! Curious there is only a half dozen ranked OL's in the top 20 ... I would like one of them .... Gray of course would make a nice local pick ... we don't have enough Bisons on our team

Can we have the numb er one pick sign first and then draft him second?

I find the lack of action in Toronto about their future direction is what everyone is waiting for. Once they make their move everyone else is going to make their coaching and management decisions. I remember how slow deciding the Bombers were not very long ago in naming their senior change. It ultimately meant getting stuck with Etchevery as DC ... ouch.

I realize some on this site absolutely hate any rule changes to our fair CFL game ... still look how the changes to our convert rules for example have made the game more interesting for the fans For the coming year I suggest some kind of adjustment to the review process is in order ... I am interested to see how we can do it better, more fairly, and remove the frivolous reviews while keeping the referees in check/ To me one of the strangest most foreign rules is our touchback rule. It feels like NFL envy. In every other kicking situation we have the rouge, but on the kickoff we want to suspend the rouge for a team making an amazingly good kick. Lets change the rule back to scoring a rouge for kickoffs through the end zone. Lets get back to rouge consistency though our whole game. Third, something a touch more surprising: change the scoring on a safety from two points to three points. The way the rules have changed teams are able to "buy" their way out of bad field position. All the hard work of good defense and punting coverage, can be disposed of for slightly more than a rouge. Make teams trapped deep in their own end work their way out of it, not buy their way out of it. Faced with the prospect of giving up three points and the either giving the ball back or getting the ball back which would you choose? I would also like to see a change on infractions away from the play, especially on kick returns and on passing plays. I mean if you can't have pass interference because the ball was not "catchable" lets apply similar thinking to slight contact infractions away from the play. I am not talking roughing but the normal jostling that is happening all over the field. The last thing I would like to see different in the coming year is more certain and costly penalties and suspensions for injury maker infractions like helmet to helmet and roughing the passer. We need to keep our starting QBs upright. It seems the NFL is doing a better job of this than we are. I don't know how exactly to make it better but we have to do something. I would like to see some "non-reviewable" or "non-appealable" automatic suspensions after so many roughing infractions. One game suspension and perhaps a two game and then three game if the practice by that player persists. I don't mind a player losing his livlihood for a week if he is taking it away from another player's career. ' '

Statistics dictating awards or good judgment ??? Campbell won the Grey Cup over Dickenson .... the awarders got it wrong