Blue Bombers Forum
February 21, 2019, 05:48:52 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
 11 
 on: Today at 01:25:27 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by TecnoGenius
With F.A. cooling off, it seems likely to me that the ratio is going to end up the same as last year, 6 on offence and 1 on defence.  Swap Loffler for Jones and either 2 Natl. O-linemen and 3 Natl. receivers or 3 Natl. O-linemen and 2 Natl. receivers plus Harris which was the situation last year.  I'm open to an "out of the blue" signing or trade that would alter this prediction, but I don't expect it.

I totally agree.  We will be same as last year, or +1 NAT on D.  No way we go +1 on O.  And I think it's 99% certain it's 3 NAT OL.

 12 
 on: Today at 01:14:23 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by Throw Long Bannatyne
With F.A. cooling off, it seems likely to me that the ratio is going to end up the same as last year, 6 on offence and 1 on defence.  Swap Loffler for Jones and either 2 Natl. O-linemen and 3 Natl. receivers or 3 Natl. O-linemen and 2 Natl. receivers plus Harris which was the situation last year.  I'm open to an "out of the blue" signing or trade that would alter this prediction, but I don't expect it.

 13 
 on: Today at 01:10:58 AM 
Started by theaardvark - Last post by TecnoGenius
Except neither are comparable.

Of course they are the "comparables".  What do you think the comparable is for CFL then, NHL?  MLB?  When CFL players mull being a star in the CFL vs being a bench-warmer in the NFL, they are making comparisons.  NFL is their comparable.  When they consider the AAF vs the CFL, that's their comparable.

Just because the NFL is way above CFL in $$ doesn't mean the two don't get compared.  And even if that was so, the AAF surely is a comparable since the low/mid-tier salaries are nearly identical.

 14 
 on: Today at 12:50:43 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by Throw Long Bannatyne
But of the two scenarios, which seems more likely? My money's on the latter. And if that is the case and he's agreed to take less money for the team's benefit, kudos to him on putting the team first.

I would agree, hard to believe Nichols isn't already lying awake nights thinking about the difficult QB decision the Bombers will have to make at the end of this upcoming season and doing everything in his power to avoid being the odd man out.  The Bombers are his best vehicle to achieve career and playoff success and the timing is nigh.  The thought of re-booting his career with Sask. or an Eastern club next year must give him the "Willy's".

Realistically I think he'll end up getting paid the same, neither more nor less and the justification probably comes down to restructuring the payments for the benefit of the club or for tax reasons. No big deal.

 15 
 on: Today at 12:31:03 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by fansince79
I?d like to see Washington and Simonise step up and make an impact. They?re both big targets and may be able stretch the field. But I?m not holding my breath.

 16 
 on: Today at 12:30:00 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by 66 Chevelle
let's see... $150K Canadian is roughly equal to about $6300 US, before tax implications, per game for an 18 game season... $70K US is equal to $7000 per game, before tax implications, but only US tax...   less games, more money... not much to think about really...

and, while most think that nobody is watching the AAF, the early Saturday game on TNT had over 1,000,000 viewers, the 2 games on the NFL Network both drew about 425,000 (which is considered a premium channel and is not included in most cable lower tier offereings)... the CBS Sports Network, another premium channel, isn't on Nielsen so those numbers aren't readily available...  And while 'butts in the seats' numbers may not seem impressive, San Antonio again had over 27K in the stands and Birmingham over 17K... I don't think those are numbers to really sneeze at this early... people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones...

plus, the NFL as an entity is watching those games, which to players, is probably pretty important...

 17 
 on: Today at 12:23:17 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by blue_gold_84
Bond is a guard. Foketi has always been a backup

He's playing dumb. He knew exactly what you meant.

 18 
 on: Today at 12:22:31 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by kkc60
Foketi?  Bond? 
Bond is a guard. Foketi has always been a backup

 19 
 on: Today at 12:20:20 AM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by blue_gold_84
Foketi?  Bond? 

Bryant. Hardrick.

 20 
 on: February 20, 2019, 11:57:39 PM 
Started by ModAdmin - Last post by 66 Chevelle
66Chevelle is going to drool over this post

blue_or_die says he knows me, lol...  but you're right, booch is saying exactly what I've been saying for almost 2 years now...  I'm just not sure why some don't want to accept it or admit it's the truth...

you can choose to blame who or whatever you want, whether that's the receivers, the scheme, or the quarterback, however, before you do, I challenge anyone that wants to put it solely in the laps of the receivers to go back and actually watch games from 2017 and 2018... you'll see that booch is absolutely correct in the types of pass plays we execute... none of which really lend themselves to receivers making huge yards after the catch, most are under the defense and in the box which allows the defense to almost immediately collapse upon the play...

playing receiver in Winnipeg right now is a tough gig...  it's not a place a receiver will want to land if their priority is to collect game tape in an effort to showcase their talents for a, or another, shot in the NFL... it just is what it is... people are wanting 'game breaking' performance out of 'possession type' play calling... and, that type of play calling seems to play into Nichols' strengths...

when Nichols is completing a lot of passes early, he seems to become more confident and his long ball is better... that's why it seems like when it's going good, it's going real good, or when it's going not so good, the numbers for the day as a whole reflect such...

that's why I say signing Dressler is important to our receiving success in 2019... say what you want, but Nichols seems to be a better QB when Dressler is near by... and though you can automatically pencil him in on missing a few games a year, nobody is better at working this pass offense than him at getting open and presenting Nichols a target on almost every down...

what I don't get, is that those short passes are going to be there regardless, why send all 5 receivers into the box? let Harris come out of the backfield, send Demski and Dressler on those short safe routes and then open it up and let the 2 others go...

but I've said it countless times, 2 passes of 3 yards looks great in the pass completion percentage column but it still results in a punt... throwing a screen pass on 2nd and 7 just makes me shake my head each and every time...

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!