iso_55 Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 Looks like it's basically Collaros or nothing for Bomber fans. Then Miller & Walters better get busy & make sure he comes here or else. In your statement, does that make Drew Willy the nothing? And "or else"? Yikes! **** Personally, I wouldn't mind the Drew Willy (alone) scenario, and yes that would mean less experience, but if Hamilton doesn't sign Burris, how is their situation going to be any different? I just think that if Collaros signs in Hamilton, the Bomber fanbase is going to explode with criticism. The fans almost expect this to be a done deal & reading the comments here it does nothing to change my opinion. Everything else will be a poor second or even third best. That's my "Or Else" scenario. The honeymoon with Miller & Walters will be over.
gbill2004 Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Posted January 29, 2014 You are right, the average fan would be extatic if we got Burris, and that is what sells tickets...getting the casual fans excited. Meanwhile, the hardcore fan would prefer Collaros or Willy. But that doesn't matter because we buy tickets no matter what.
iso_55 Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 Looks like it's basically Collaros or nothing for Bomber fans. Then Miller & Walters better get busy & make sure he comes here or else. Not at all. Some fans here feel that way, but I guarantee the average fan would be thrilled to hear we've acquired a veteran QB like Burris, 38 years old or not. Hope you're right. I dunno. See my comments above...
JuranBoldenRules Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 Looks like it's basically Collaros or nothing for Bomber fans. Then Miller & Walters better get busy & make sure he comes here or else. Not at all. Some fans here feel that way, but I guarantee the average fan would be thrilled to hear we've acquired a veteran QB like Burris, 38 years old or not. And they'll be thrilled with 6-12 (Durant, Lulay, Mitchell/Tate, Reilly...we'd be starting the season with undoubtedly the worst QB in our division, at 39 years old) and back at square one in the year we host the Grey Cup. Better build a 2011 defence.
sweep the leg Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 Looks like it's basically Collaros or nothing for Bomber fans. Then Miller & Walters better get busy & make sure he comes here or else. Not at all. Some fans here feel that way, but I guarantee the average fan would be thrilled to hear we've acquired a veteran QB like Burris, 38 years old or not. I think most casual fans would be happy with either one, provided the news tells them they should be excited. MOBomberFan and Atomic 2
Guest Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 Meanwhile, the hardcore fan would prefer Collaros or Willy. But that doesn't matter because we buy tickets no matter what. I'd prefer neither, but wouldn't be opposed to bringing either of them in.
17to85 Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 Looks like it's basically Collaros or nothing for Bomber fans. Then Miller & Walters better get busy & make sure he comes here or else. Not at all. Some fans here feel that way, but I guarantee the average fan would be thrilled to hear we've acquired a veteran QB like Burris, 38 years old or not. I think most casual fans would be happy with either one, provided the news tells them they should be excited. The casual fans are easily pleased in the offseason. Sign someone they've heard up and blow so much smoke up their asses and they'll lap it up. Then once the team loses a game everyone is going to be screaming for people to be fired.
Mr Dee Posted January 29, 2014 Report Posted January 29, 2014 The casual fans are easily pleased in the offseason. Sign someone they've heard up and blow so much smoke up their asses and they'll lap it up. Then once the team loses a game everyone is going to be screaming for people to be fired. Well, if they blow that much smoke up their asses, they'll be screaming for an entirely different reason. Besides, there's always butt plugs like Mr Ruleless that casual fans can be directed to.
gbill2004 Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Posted January 29, 2014 @DarrinBauming: Henry Burris: “I would definitely go to Winnipeg – I just want to somewhere I'm wanted.." via/ @scratchingpost #Bombers
ALuCsRED Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 I'd take Burris. At least we'd have someone that can read a blitz, throw a long ball, or escape the pocket while still looking up field. He has years on him, but also many years not playing (NFL). He has not had concussion issues, leaving his decision making is quick. I'm not touting him as the next one, but at least we'd be competitive on a game-to-game basis. Buck played to not lose. Burris plays to win. There is a difference.
17to85 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 @DarrinBauming: Henry Burris: “I would definitely go to Winnipeg – I just want to somewhere I'm wanted.." via/ @scratchingpost #Bombers Roughly translated "I'm desperate, I'll play anywhere I have a spot!"
Mr. Perfect Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 I'd take Burris. At least we'd have someone that can read a blitz, throw a long ball, or escape the pocket while still looking up field. He has years on him, but also many years not playing (NFL). He has not had concussion issues, leaving his decision making is quick. I'm not touting him as the next one, but at least we'd be competitive on a game-to-game basis. Buck played to not lose. Burris plays to win. There is a difference. And there's a difference between playing to win and being stupid and taking unnecessary risks and forcing things that aren't there that costs you games. At 39 he still hasn't found that happy medium.
Guest Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/henry-burris-talks-about-his Also I disagree with the notion that Buck played not to lose. IMO you don't play the way that Buck did just to avoid losing, you do it to win.
Mr. Perfect Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Yeah taking Solomon Elimimian on head on is definitely playing not to lose...
Mr Dee Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 I'd take Burris. At least we'd have someone that can read a blitz, throw a long ball, or escape the pocket while still looking up field. He has years on him, but also many years not playing (NFL). He has not had concussion issues, leaving his decision making is quick. I'm not touting him as the next one, but at least we'd be competitive on a game-to-game basis. Buck played to not lose. Burris plays to win. There is a difference. The only thing I could disagree with here is the Buck line and I know why you've said it. It was that asinine decision to have a protective package to "shield" Buck from getting hit. Instead, he got hit worse than ever because...because he is a scrambling QB who was told not to scramble. Duh. The fact that that offence was directed by a HC who played not to lose was the final straw. Buck couldn't last more than 3 games…Burris played in all 18 games last year, so there's the difference.
ALuCsRED Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/henry-burris-talks-about-his Also I disagree with the notion that Buck played not to lose. IMO you don't play the way that Buck did just to avoid losing, you do it to win. All I can think is.... And there's another 3 yard out on 2nd and 10. He's comes on Mike Renaud to punt for the 7th time this half.
gbill2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Posted January 30, 2014 How would you compare Hamilton's 2013 OL to the Bombers 2013 OL?
ALuCsRED Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 I'd take Burris. At least we'd have someone that can read a blitz, throw a long ball, or escape the pocket while still looking up field. He has years on him, but also many years not playing (NFL). He has not had concussion issues, leaving his decision making is quick. I'm not touting him as the next one, but at least we'd be competitive on a game-to-game basis. Buck played to not lose. Burris plays to win. There is a difference. And there's a difference between playing to win and being stupid and taking unnecessary risks and forcing things that aren't there that costs you games. At 39 he still hasn't found that happy medium. Notice I said his decision making was quick, not that his decision making was necessarily always the best. I'd rather see the QB attempt to do something rather than taking 5 seconds to watch his 1st and 2nd read, and then getting sacked. To me it's like taking a knee in a tie game with 23 seconds on the clock when you've only won 3 games all year.
17to85 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 That implies that Burris actually makes decisions. I don't think he is a quick decision maker, he's just able to avoid pressure in the pocket is all.
Guest Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/henry-burris-talks-about-his Also I disagree with the notion that Buck played not to lose. IMO you don't play the way that Buck did just to avoid losing, you do it to win. All I can think is.... And there's another 3 yard out on 2nd and 10. He's comes on Mike Renaud to punt for the 7th time this half. Is that all on Buck though ? Seems to me that happened a lot this season as well. As a side note, I'd be good with bringing in Burris for a couple of season to be "the guy", but only if we bring in Marsh to be the future.
DR. CFL Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 The future needs to be now for this franchise.
Guest Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 The future needs to be now for this franchise. What if Willy or Collaros bomb here in the early going, does this fanbase have the patience to deal with that ? Not saying that they will bomb or anything, just a thought.
gbill2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Posted January 30, 2014 I'm glad we're at least players in free agency. If Mack were still GM he'd likely be at his all inclusive resort in Mexico right now with no clue what is going on with Collaros. iso_55 1
Jacquie Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 How would you compare Hamilton's 2013 OL to the Bombers 2013 OL? To start, Hamilton gave up 15 more sacks than the Bombers last season.
Brandon Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 17 is discrediting Burris way to much. Signing Burris would instantly give us our best qb since 2007. sweep the leg, voodoochylde, Atomic and 2 others 5
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now