Week 7 - Other Games: EDM@OTT TOR@HAM BC@CGY

Blueforlife · July 22, 2024, 02:13:41 AM

Hot potato lol

Blueforlife · July 22, 2024, 02:15:51 AM

Mills back wrist ok

J5V · July 22, 2024, 02:16:41 AM

Mills back and running in beast mode!

Blueforlife · July 22, 2024, 02:19:28 AM

A fun game that had some dull moments

Blueforlife · July 22, 2024, 02:19:54 AM

Have a good night guys nice to have an active GDT

GOLDMEMBER · July 22, 2024, 02:25:38 AM

VAJ looked rather crapy today.

Blue Bombers starring at no playoffs. Whoof!

GOLDMEMBER · July 22, 2024, 02:26:42 AM

Quote from: J5V on July 22, 2024, 01:17:58 AMGreat adjustments by BC going back to Stanback and quick hitters to quell the D-line pressure of the Stamps.

but then promptly forgot about there running game what so ever!

Lincoln Locomotive · July 22, 2024, 03:15:21 AM

Sometimes it appears that BC's offence can move the ball at will...VAJ throwing a few picks is the difference maker in this game.....but even in defeat VAJ has come into his own as an elite QB. Give Calgary's D full props for pressuring him and keeping him uncomfortable most of the game. My question is this....how can we score 41 points against a good D one game and then score 9 measly points the next? Boggles the mind!!

dd · July 22, 2024, 04:23:10 AM

Calgary was very physical with Adams today, I m thinking he was a bit twitchy back there and can't blame him. BC s offense seemed to struggle tonight and not sure if it was Calgary's D or their O/ Adams was just off tonight.

TecnoGenius · July 22, 2024, 07:55:33 AM

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 21, 2024, 03:10:19 PMKevin Brown ain't no slouch, although he hasn't looked as good as he did last year when he rushed for over 1,000 yds.

Brown is a speed back, and that has limited use, and can be defended against. EDM really needs a power back to help out their weak OL. Teams have figured him out.

I think he has a bright future, but he'll need to be on a team that's humming a lot better than EDM currently.

As it stands this season, EDM has a worse run game than BC with Mizzel in '23.

TecnoGenius · July 22, 2024, 08:00:24 AM

Quote from: Blue In BC on July 21, 2024, 05:49:38 PMWhy was it a penalty? By definition it's not part of the uniform and IIRC he had that happen last week as well with no penalty.

I was wondering whether he had extensions as part of his dreads?

It wasn't a penalty. No flag. Fully legal.

We need a "Grant hair extensions" thread. I had never even thought of that possibility. Who would have guessed the dude had fake hair this whole time!! I'm a bit disappointed now! Faker!

TecnoGenius · July 22, 2024, 08:07:09 AM

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 21, 2024, 05:58:17 PMThey seriously have to consider eliminating this method of tackle somehow, either make it illegal or restrain the hair growth to what can be contained within the helmet. To much danger to the players neck when taken down by the hair, worse effect than a horse collar.

Why?

Every player is susceptible to a HC. No one makes a "choice" to be a viable HC tackle target. That makes it an every-player whole-league issue.

In contrast, only Grant and maybe a couple of other CFL players are susceptible to a hair tackle. And that is their choice, and they know the risk, and they can negate that risk at any moment by having a sane hair cut.

These aren't the same, even if the risk of injury is.

There is another option for long-hair players: tuck it all in their jersey. That whole mess can be hidden inside the jersey. Of course, they won't do that, because the whole point of the hair is to make an on-field fashion statement.

I for one loved the hair tackle: great entertainment! If Grant chooses that, and wants to cost his team potential TDs, so be it.

TecnoGenius · July 22, 2024, 09:29:26 AM

Quote from: Jesse on July 21, 2024, 10:46:29 PMCan't tell people to cut their hair, imo. If that's the way they want it, leave them be.

Agreed. However, Grant's hair can't just hurt Grant, it can hurt his team. Who's to say that a much-easier-to-make hair tackle doesn't cost a team a TD in a GC? As such, I think it would be perfectly fine for a team to put in their players' contracts that such pullable/tacklable hair be prohibited. AFAIK no team does that. If a player didn't like the contract, they don't have to sign with the team.

Like in F1, McLaren has always had a conservative "stodgy" set of rules for drivers. Hamilton had to always have a buzz cut when he raced for them. When he left and went to a new team, he started doing the more "wild" cuts. It's a team decision to reflect a team attitude, and athletes can choose to take it or leave it.

So leave it up to the players, or if a team wants, a team contract rule. In the meantime, I'll get my popcorn out and watch more crazy Grant tackles. Now that teams see the damage it can do, they'll all be gunning for those 'locks.

TecnoGenius · July 22, 2024, 10:16:24 AM

Quote from: Pete on July 22, 2024, 12:03:53 AMhow does the command center decide when to overrule with no challenge? And why don't they when its an obvious bad call such as PI

Because new rules were introduced the last few years as to what plays were automatically-reviewable without any direction from the on-field refs nor a HC challenge. Most of the UR/RTP and OC penalties now fall into that category.

It's mostly so EITS can flag uncalled dangerous RTP stuff, but it can also be used to pick up flags (as they did here).

J5V · July 22, 2024, 10:22:10 AM

Quote from: GOLDMEMBER on July 22, 2024, 02:25:38 AMVAJ looked rather crapy today.

Yes he did. He overthrows his receivers when he's hurried. If the Bombers could ever get on a bit of a roll they could squeak in there and be a surprise. That Sask game is either going to galvanise this group or demoralised them. There's enough veteran leadership there to hopefully change our fortunes. We just have to get Zach playing like the Zach of old.