Official Game Day Thread - Winnipeg @ Edmonton, August 21, 2026

blueandgoldguy · **Today** at 05:42:41 AM

Quote from: Tecno on Today at 05:38:46 AMLet's see how we do against MTL. If we lose but keep it this close and have periods of domination, then what? If we are keeping up with the 2 best teams then by definition we are not a "bad team".

Maybe we are currently a team that just can't close. We're like EDM was when they were starting to get good. I'm not really sure at this point, but will know more next week.

If we lose and keep it close against Montreal, we probably have a decent chance to win at least one game against the Riders. We might even have a chance to win 2 if all those injured players Sasky is missing are not playing in 2 and 3 weeks time.

Blueforlife · **Today** at 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: Jesse on Today at 05:40:51 AMYou mean in his 2 carries in the entire second half?

They took it away

I'm with Techno on this one

Blueforlife · **Today** at 05:44:56 AM

Quote from: blueandgoldguy on Today at 05:42:41 AMIf we lose and keep it close against Montreal, we probably have a decent chance to win at least one game against the Riders. We might even have a chance to win 2 if all those injured players Sasky is missing are not playing in 2 and 3 weeks time.

We split with Sask likely imo, paying 5 to 1 odds we don't win both

Blueforlife · Last Edit: **Today** at 05:50:17 AM by Blueforlife

Quote from: blueandgoldguy on Today at 05:36:25 AMIn a 9 team league bad and below average it's all the same. I will keep repeating that to you. Now why don't you go to google AI to give me your next response lol.

You asked for it. My summary Ottawa, Jake is bad, we and Zach are below average lol

That guy's argument is common among critics of the CFL, but it overlooks the mathematical reality of the league's structure. In a 9-team league where 6 teams qualify for the postseason, a below-average team gets a ticket to the playoffs, while a bad team goes home.Because the bar for entry is so low, confusing "below average" with "bad" is the exact mistake that keeps casual fans from understanding how the league works.The Math: 67% vs. 33%The most critical differentiator is the cutoff line for postseason qualification:Below-Average Teams (The 67%): Since two-thirds of the league makes the playoffs, a team can be statistically below average (e.g., placing 5th or 6th overall) and still be a fully active playoff team.Bad Teams (The 33%): Only 3 teams are eliminated each year. To miss the playoffs completely in a 9-team league, a team has to be objectively terrible, not just mediocre.The Crossover Rule ProofThe clearest evidence that they are not the same is the CFL crossover rule.If the 4th-place team in Division A finishes with a better record than the 3rd-place team in Division B, that 4th-place team steals the playoff spot and crosses over to the other bracket. This means a below-average 4th-place team can actually be superior to an entire tier of the opposing division. A truly bad team is never in a position to utilize this rule because they lack the necessary wins to force a crossover.Real-World Impact: The 2026 StandingsThe differences in the 2026 CFL standings show exactly why the two tiers are entirely distinct:Below Average (The 4-5 BC Lions): The BC Lions have a sub-.500 record. They are statistically below average, yet they sit safely in the 4th spot in the West. Because of their competitive metrics, they remain a dangerous threat to secure a playoff spot or trigger a crossover.Bad (The 0-10 Ottawa Redblacks): The Ottawa Redblacks have failed to win a single game. They have a -145 point differential and are completely non-viable.Saying they are "all the same" ignores the massive gap between a team fighting for a Grey Cup spot and a team struggling to win a single game.

blueandgoldguy · **Today** at 05:52:20 AM

Quote from: Blueforlife on Today at 05:48:02 AMYou asked for it.

That guy's argument is common among critics of the CFL, but it overlooks the mathematical reality of the league's structure. In a 9-team league where 6 teams qualify for the postseason, a below-average team gets a ticket to the playoffs, while a bad team goes home.Because the bar for entry is so low, confusing "below average" with "bad" is the exact mistake that keeps casual fans from understanding how the league works.The Math: 67% vs. 33%The most critical differentiator is the cutoff line for postseason qualification:Below-Average Teams (The 67%): Since two-thirds of the league makes the playoffs, a team can be statistically below average (e.g., placing 5th or 6th overall) and still be a fully active playoff team.Bad Teams (The 33%): Only 3 teams are eliminated each year. To miss the playoffs completely in a 9-team league, a team has to be objectively terrible, not just mediocre.The Crossover Rule ProofThe clearest evidence that they are not the same is the CFL crossover rule.If the 4th-place team in Division A finishes with a better record than the 3rd-place team in Division B, that 4th-place team steals the playoff spot and crosses over to the other bracket. This means a below-average 4th-place team can actually be superior to an entire tier of the opposing division. A truly bad team is never in a position to utilize this rule because they lack the necessary wins to force a crossover.Real-World Impact: The 2026 StandingsThe differences in the 2026 CFL standings show exactly why the two tiers are entirely distinct:Below Average (The 4-5 BC Lions): The BC Lions have a sub-.500 record. They are statistically below average, yet they sit safely in the 4th spot in the West. Because of their competitive metrics, they remain a dangerous threat to secure a playoff spot or trigger a crossover.Bad (The 0-10 Ottawa Redblacks): The Ottawa Redblacks have failed to win a single game. They have a -145 point differential and are completely non-viable.Saying they are "all the same" ignores the massive gap between a team fighting for a Grey Cup spot and a team struggling to win a single game.

Nothing says low effort like posting AI. By the way, AI can be incorrect. Just thought you should know.

Mikerahl · **Today** at 05:54:26 AM

Quote from: Blueforlife on Today at 05:42:59 AMThey took it away

I'm with Techno on this one

IMO Condell took it away... again.

His first carry in the 2nd half he got 6 yards... and then they inexplicably did whatever they did on second down with Demski that drive before punting it.

His next carry didn't come for another 15 in game minutes and based on the formation and the game flow they might as well have just yelled over the line that it was going directly to Brady... Willson picked it up immediately on the broadcast.

So of the 13 (!!!) plays the Bombers ran in the 2nd half, Brady had 2 rushes, Demski had 1, there were 2 deep passes (1 picked off), Collaros got sacked twice, got flushed another time. Before that first sack he sailed a pass to White on the sideline, Nield caught one and dropped one, Demski and Wilson both had a single catch.

Not sure what Brady is expected to do there. First half was way more balanced run/pass wise and they just went away from it.

Blueforlife · Last Edit: **Today** at 06:13:57 AM by Blueforlife

Quote from: blueandgoldguy on Today at 05:52:20 AMNothing says low effort like posting AI. By the way, AI can be incorrect. Just thought you should know.

Yup its often is but in this case backs up my position by clearly stating the differences between bad and below average 1st in general, 2nd for sports, then for cfl qbs and finally for teams. In this case AI provides a good summary and counter 3rd party argument.

I have enjoyed other people's take on chartecizing the team, players and coaches. We all have different opinions that we think are valid. It would appear yours varied a lot tonight and was not consistent. Mine position remains the same.

Get AI to prove to me that bad and below average are the same. Takes two to tango. Yes using AI is low effort. Time and place for it. I don't trust it for some things, basic concepts usually ok. It did a good job tonight imo to provide info when two people didn't agree.

Blueforlife · **Today** at 05:59:08 AM

Quote from: Mikerahl on Today at 05:54:26 AMIMO Condell took it away... again.

His first carry in the 2nd half he got 6 yards... and then they inexplicably did whatever they did on second down with Demski that drive before punting it.

His next carry didn't come for another 15 in game minutes and based on the formation and the game flow they might as well have just yelled over the line that it was going directly to Brady... Willson picked it up immediately on the broadcast.

So of the 13 (!!!) plays the Bombers ran in the 2nd half, Brady had 2 rushes, Demski had 1, there were 2 deep passes (1 picked off), Collaros got sacked twice, got flushed another time. Before that first sack he sailed a pass to White on the sideline, Nield caught one and dropped one, Demski and Wilson both had a single catch.

Not sure what Brady is expected to do there. First half was way more balanced run/pass wise and they just went away from it.

Little bit of both. We went away from it because they took it away imo. I would have kept trying it a bit more. We took away the run and short pass from Cody at times so he went deep on us which worked about half the time maybe?

Yes 1st half was as balanced as it comes.

Throw Long Bannatyne · **Today** at 05:59:59 AM

Quote from: Tecno on Today at 04:52:07 AMPokey could have caught that deep rail pass. Kenny probably would have found a way. He could have stopped and ladder-climbed to catch it away from the rail. Or maybe Luke's idea would have worked: turn the opposite way. It was a too-hot pass by Zach, but the best in the league could have done it -- especially since it was 100% uncontested, the REC could do literally anything they wanted.

Pokey probably overly concerned it's going to bounce off his helmet again, thus he over compensated by turning 180 instead of catching it over his shoulder. Nonetheless Zach could have thrown a better pass.

Blueforlife · Last Edit: **Today** at 06:06:15 AM by Blueforlife

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on Today at 05:59:59 AMPokey probably overly concerned it's going to bounce off his helmet again, thus he over compensated by turning 180 instead of catching it over his shoulder. Nonetheless Zach could have thrown a better pass.

Good way to put it agree all

Such a pivotal moment

I would love to hear both players takes on it

Zach would own the mistake imo

blueandgoldguy · **Today** at 06:12:37 AM

Anyone hear Mike O"Shea on the postgame show. He seems completely indifferent to what is going on out there. Gives off the impression that the Bombers shouldn't expect to win, but maybe they will have a chance. Then again Mike with your philosophy of loyalty over actual playability and your inability to make sufficient changes these past 3 plus years I guess the fans shouldn't expect the Bombers to win either.

Mikerahl · **Today** at 06:16:29 AM

Quote from: Blueforlife on Today at 05:59:08 AMLittle bit of both. We went away from it because they took it away imo. I would have kept trying it a bit more. We took away the run and short pass from Cody at times so he went deep on us which worked about half the time maybe?

Yes 1st half was as balanced as it comes.

What worked in the first half was short passes, mixing in Brady, and then periodically taking deep shots.

What happened in the second half has been typical all year... either everything more than 10 yards downfield, or telegraph a Brady run followed by a deep bomb that is more likely to be caught by a defender than a Bomber. Looking at the game in 30, it looks like they split out Brady a whole bunch, so he was only in backfield for 8 or 9 plays

It's happened enough to be a pattern

Tecno · **Today** at 06:28:15 AM

Quote from: Mikerahl on Today at 06:16:29 AMWhat worked in the first half was short passes, mixing in Brady, and then periodically taking deep shots.

Yup. And I should clarify when I say Brady was getting stuffed later that that includes late first half. We went full turtle well before half time.

Like you said what worked early was a pass-mostly game, with Brady converting 2nd & shorts. In fact, that was working so well I was quite shocked EDM didn't try to shut Brady down on 2nd & short at all. They easily could have. I guess their intel said Brady was only a thing on 1st down. Clearly they could have shut us down on 2nd & short too.

Maybe we just telegraph the 1st down Brady runs too much with the max-jumbo set. I'll go back and look, maybe the 2nd & short we were running normal O and more of an RPO look. If so, why aren't we doing that on the obvious 1st down Brady runs too??

In football you never ever every go away from what is clearly dominating. You keep pounding it the same way until they make you stop. EDM never made us stop our winning plan. We stopped it. MOS made the call to turtle expecting that our D was going to stop EDM on the deep shots. No one in the braintrust thought EDM might switch to the full d&d and take our advantage away?

So stupid.

bluengold204 · **Today** at 07:09:38 AM

Quote from: Tecno on Today at 05:18:17 AMSure, of course. But I care more about what he's doing right now. And what he's doing right now is looking like the best QB in the league in that 1st H until they went turtle.

That has to count for something.

Counts for squat when the second half he looked like a bum, just like he has for most of the year