Blue Bombers Forum
October 22, 2017, 03:43:04 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Our receivers  (Read 2133 times)
Lincoln Locomotive
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1533



« Reply #60 on: October 10, 2017, 04:17:26 AM »

come on, Lincoln... really?

this all started because I said that unless those in power wanted 'change' that there was no reason to acquire new receivers, basically, see reply 19 for my actual comment..

then, for the rest of the story, see replies 20, 21, 22, 29, 30, and 45... and never once did I say that we should replace anyone, I was giving an example and if you, or anyone else here, can't read what I typed and see that, well, I can't help ya... I tried several time to explain that to me, replacing an injured player, unable to play, is different than changing a player for the purpose of change...

defense rest...
  I wasn't trying to hurt your feelings however methinks thou doth protesteth too much!
« Last Edit: October 10, 2017, 04:29:25 AM by Lincoln Locomotive » Logged

" Leo Lewis was the best player I ever coached, on either side of the border"!

Bud Grant, when asked who was the best player he ever coached
66 Chevelle
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 400


« Reply #61 on: October 10, 2017, 05:29:33 AM »

  I wasn't trying to hurt your feelings however methinks thou doth protesteth too much!

I'm not sure that's possible, Lincoln... on second thought, I'm positive...   Undecided
Logged

just because you can doesn't mean you should...
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10116



« Reply #62 on: October 10, 2017, 10:48:13 AM »

Actually, that's not true, but don't let the truth get in the way of a good story... If fact, I've advocated just the opposite and supported the current group of receivers and Lapolice's offensive game plan... here are a couple of posts that I've made lately:

"it's a numbers thing... can't get around it... I'd love to see him play but unless LaPo is going to drastically change what the offense has been doing all year it wouldn't have much effect on the game as a whole. And at this point you need to dance with the one that brought you, however, I'm sure that LDW will be prepared and ready to play if called upon. Wouldn't it be cool to see Adams on one side and Washington on the other and have Nichols tell them both, 'go long' and just chuck it to whichever one is open? Maybe next year..."

and...

"again, I'm not complaining, but spin it how you want...

but to the bigger point, a lot on here complain about the receiving corp and want different receivers... my question is why? you have a quality group now that is executing the game plan successfully AND unless the Bombers are planning on and willing to change their game there isn't much point in bringing in deep threat receivers if you don't really plan on throwing deep much, Adams is capable of and is currently supporting that need adequately... Which is my whole point of what I was originally saying, why activate Washington if you don't plan on changing your game, which I wouldn't, we're winning... dance with the one that brought ya...

but moving forward, looking at the numbers will tell you what the team needs... acquiring players that don't fit YOUR game is not smart ball or a value for the buck... Your team doesn't need different players, my player needs a different team, which I'm fine with..."


However, continue to spin it however you please...
66, I think you are a great poster, you have some great ideas you add lots to the discussion and I hope you stick around, but it's clear based on your previous posts that you've got a hard on for Washington. 
Logged
GCn17
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 19166


« Reply #63 on: October 10, 2017, 11:14:40 AM »

66, I think you are a great poster, you have some great ideas you add lots to the discussion and I hope you stick around, but it's clear based on your previous posts that you've got a hard on for Washington. 

About as big as your hard on for Nichols....just saying...we all have our favorites.
Logged

Unabashed free thinker. No Kool-Aid in my fridge. I don't get blinded by sunglasses at night.
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10116



« Reply #64 on: October 10, 2017, 11:16:25 AM »

About as big as your hard on for Nichols....just saying...we all have our favorites.
Nichols has one of the top QB ratings in the league and is statistically one of the best QBs in the CFL. That's a terrible comparison GCn17  Roll Eyes
Logged
Sec223
Full Member
***
Posts: 205


« Reply #65 on: October 10, 2017, 11:16:36 AM »

Are you kids done ? Back to the topic please.
Logged
GCn17
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 19166


« Reply #66 on: October 10, 2017, 11:20:53 AM »

Nichols has one of the top QB ratings in the league and is statistically one of the best QBs in the CFL. That's a terrible comparison GCn17  Roll Eyes

Nichols is a hell of a QB, which is why you try to remind us ad nauseum that it's his release that saved the day last year and deflect any and all blame from him when someone offers up a criticism of his play....and that's all right....we all have our favorite players, whether it's the starting QB or a PR player. We all post with agendas when it comes to certain players is all I'm saying. 66 Chevelle is not unique in that regard.
Logged

Unabashed free thinker. No Kool-Aid in my fridge. I don't get blinded by sunglasses at night.
kkc60
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1568


« Reply #67 on: October 10, 2017, 11:59:14 AM »

66, I think you are a great poster, you have some great ideas you add lots to the discussion and I hope you stick around, but it's clear based on your previous posts that you've got a hard on for Washington. 
And you have a tendency to refer to Washington as "terrible" whenever the opportunity arises (although I don't think you've said it on this thread yet)
Logged
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10116



« Reply #68 on: October 10, 2017, 12:05:49 PM »

And you have a tendency to refer to Washington as "terrible" whenever the opportunity arises (although I don't think you've said it on this thread yet)
Yep, 66 and me have polar opposite views on Washington, that's for sure. 
Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 25028


Go BlueGolds!


« Reply #69 on: October 10, 2017, 06:05:44 PM »

you weren't home schooled, were you?

because that, my friend, is what we in the states call an example... a scenario provided to demonstrate a concept or idea and used in an attempt to provide clarity... not once did I say that is what we SHOULD do, I'm content with what we have now... however, besides not understanding what an example is, you seemed to be struggling with the concept of replace vs. change and I was just trying to shed some light for you... obviously I need a bigger light...

What a piss poor attitude you have. Simply because some stranger on a forum doesn't agree with your outlandish opinion.

Your example is ridiculous, so why even mention it? You haven't shed light on anything, either. All you've managed to do is demonstrate you can't have a mature discussion.

One more thing: replace and change can be synonymous terms. I learned that in elementary school.

Not sure what schools you went to in the States but your "concept" seems a little iffy.....B & G asked a legitimate question and you proceeded to diss him for it.   Using 3 PR receivers in place of 3 regulars would be IMHO ill advised at this juncture unless we they were so inept it would be an improvement....and I don't think that's the case.   

It's an absurd concept and makes no sense. I merely pointed out how player changes were in fact made Friday, regardless of the reason. That doesn't justify taking shots at someone in response.

About as big as your hard on for Nichols....just saying...we all have our favorites.

Except for the fact Nichols has proven his value.
Logged

Blue & Gold 'til I'm dead & cold.

You can't fix stupid.
thunderNlightning
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1896


« Reply #70 on: October 10, 2017, 07:19:05 PM »

The coaching staff replaced Washington for a reason early in the season. Think that is all we need to know and understand. I think by now Given should have a grasp of the play book and enough practice reps to give him a shot and see what we have in him.
Logged
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 18725



« Reply #71 on: October 10, 2017, 08:44:37 PM »

Actually, that's not true, but don't let the truth get in the way of a good story... If fact, I've advocated just the opposite and supported the current group of receivers and Lapolice's offensive game plan... here are a couple of posts that I've made lately:

"it's a numbers thing... can't get around it... I'd love to see him play but unless LaPo is going to drastically change what the offense has been doing all year it wouldn't have much effect on the game as a whole. And at this point you need to dance with the one that brought you, however, I'm sure that LDW will be prepared and ready to play if called upon. Wouldn't it be cool to see Adams on one side and Washington on the other and have Nichols tell them both, 'go long' and just chuck it to whichever one is open? Maybe next year..."

and...

"again, I'm not complaining, but spin it how you want...

but to the bigger point, a lot on here complain about the receiving corp and want different receivers... my question is why? you have a quality group now that is executing the game plan successfully AND unless the Bombers are planning on and willing to change their game there isn't much point in bringing in deep threat receivers if you don't really plan on throwing deep much, Adams is capable of and is currently supporting that need adequately... Which is my whole point of what I was originally saying, why activate Washington if you don't plan on changing your game, which I wouldn't, we're winning... dance with the one that brought ya...

but moving forward, looking at the numbers will tell you what the team needs... acquiring players that don't fit YOUR game is not smart ball or a value for the buck... Your team doesn't need different players, my player needs a different team, which I'm fine with..."


However, continue to spin it however you please...


Are you still trying to cling to the fact that you're not a friend/family member of Washington? Do you really think most people are going to believe you became a big fan of the CFL and the Bombers (complete with passionate Blue Bomber forum posts) simply because a player that played at the school you cheer for several years ago is on the team? You came on the scene when L'Damian was starting, mostly went away when he hit the PR, and now you're back when there's a chance he'll play again? This would work way better if you just admitted your relation. Every couple years there's someone who does this so it's nothing terribly new. What is odd is your refusal to admit it.

You do realize that if you became a fan simply because you casually followed Washington's career after his NCAA days and jumped all in on the CFL and Bombers because you just kinda liked him, that you would be the only fan I have ever heard of do that on this forum. And we have seen countless Americans with large fan bases back home join the team over the years.
Logged
GOLDMEMBER
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 17711


R.I.P. BLUE BONGER


« Reply #72 on: October 10, 2017, 09:46:36 PM »

About as big as your hard on for Nichols....just saying...we all have our favorites.

I have a hard on for Mike Miller!
Logged

I LOSHT MY MEMBER IN AN UNFORTUNATE SHMELTING ACCSHIDENT!
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10116



« Reply #73 on: October 10, 2017, 09:49:19 PM »

I have a hard on for Wade Miller!
Wow!   Shocked
Logged
GOLDMEMBER
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 17711


R.I.P. BLUE BONGER


« Reply #74 on: October 10, 2017, 09:52:50 PM »

Wow!   Shocked

LOL you jerk for changing my post

That has got to be sacrilegious!

BOOOO gbill BOOOO this time you've gone to far!
Logged

I LOSHT MY MEMBER IN AN UNFORTUNATE SHMELTING ACCSHIDENT!
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!