Coaches show ...

[The Zipp]

Anyone listen and care to summarize?

[Jesse]

I'll probably listen tomorrow if you can be patient, lol.

[ichabod_crane]

I see in my crystal ball Mike O'Shea saying.....WE ARE PROGRESSING EACH GAME!

Think they are on the verge of falling down a slope soon if something not shaken up! I was optimistic to last weekend they could flip this season around, but something is DEFINITELY off with this team on offence especially all this season. No more just taking to to gel or shaking the rust off. That won't cut it anymore!   Thankfully Stamps sucking too and Bombers still in the playoff hunt. Could have beaten BC last home game and even on the road in Sask. Close but no cigar and a string of losses does not give me a lot of optimism. Up to the lads to shake the trees and get off the schneid once and for all already!!

[TecnoGenius]

Best show in a long time.  Here's the TLDR; longer Tecno breakdown:

- Don't panic

- Be urgent (that's a thin line of distinction!)

- DT pointing out how we have some winnable matchups later in the year, MOS silent (to the shock of no one)

- Won't speak to the Demski DPI/challenge vis a vis league opinion: league hasn't told him squat yet

- MOS says watch the earlier contact on the legs of Demski on the DPI and more twisting

- Full confidence in Buck.  We do play double TE.  We like the EZ corner fade even though it worked only once this season

- Lucky?  He's available, it's a closed practice, make your own guess

- Rourke?  MOS says he's good enough to stay down south

- The FG/gamble question: wanting to bleed more clock, worried about Grant, worried about a deep pass DPI, WFC always leads the league in 1Y sneak

- Demski mauling in the EZ in OT... he says it's not IC because the ball had been thrown.  I'm not positive on this one, but the angles provided don't show exactly when the ball left Zach.  I thought it was deducible it had not left, but I could be wrong

- MOS goes against what he said in post-game presser and now says he'll "always" go for it on 1Y gamble every time again.  He'd do it again in the same scenario.  "Trust the OL and Strev".  "Always [...] choose not to give the ball back" (in similar SY scenarios).  Yay MOS!  He 100% matches his previous stance and all my recent comments.  I'm in full agreement.  Be bold and keep control

- Sheed: "sure Kyle" has talked to him.  It's Sheeds b-day!

- Short weeks: get rest, give them "just enough" (new stuff?), they want to prove something after a loss


!!!!!!!!
DT spotted a good one!  4Q1:38 Dinwiddie calls timeout... but he has no timeouts left because a couple of plays earlier, well inside the 3 min warning, he had a failed challenge!  Refs stop the game, clearly hand-signalling and whistling and announcing "timeout TOR" and bottle-jockeys come on to water the TOR players.

Calling a TO when you have no TO left is normally a delay of game penalty and the 2nd & long Brady run turns into a free 1st down 10Y closer.  Then we may not be in the Strev gamble situation at all, or the calculus changes because we're even closer for a FG try.

Strangely enough, I can't find this specified anywhere in the rule book.  The only thing close is about throwing a challenge when you are lacking the proper ammo.  Still I think DT is right and if you call a TO without one you also get DoG.

Rule 10 - Replay
Section 6 - Misc
If a coach challenges when not having a challenge / timeout and the game is stopped as a result a delay of game penalty will be assessed.  (10Y)

So I went back to the 3 min warning to see what the TOs actually do, since DT and MOS agreed you usually lose 1 if you still have 2.  And the TSN/stadium screens should reflect that.  Oddly enough, WPG's stayed the same at 1 TO, but TOR's still showed 2 TO right up to when TOR challenged at 4Q2:18.  Then during the challenge TSN changes the chyron to show TOR only has 1 TO!  Doh... they realized their mistake.  Then when command announces the verdict, they (correctly) set TOR to 0 TOs.

At 4Q1:38 TOR then calls a TO that they clearly do not have.  A few seconds after that  there are 2 more strange whistles that don't usually occur.  They are not the blow-in whistle.  I think this is the refs realizing their mistake and trying to fix it.  However, DT is right: it shouldn't matter if the refs correct Dinwiddie... by the simple act of him calling for a TO they should be penalized.  This ref AND command mistake may have also cost us the game.  So many little things all game and if any single one goes our way we win, yet they all went against us.

Nerd DT and nerd Tecno would get along real well, methinks.

[The Zipp]

The league should have to explain what happened with the phantom time out. 

Ambrosie has failed to instill any sort of open communication and accountability.  The biggest football league in the world admits when they err - CFL just hides and hopes nobody notices. 

[bomb squad]

Yup. There's that culture of secrecy and  "it's none of your business" on full display again. When they realized their mistake they should have blown the whistle and explained that Toronto did not have a time out after all and therefore the clock will start when play is whistled in again. That's what the microphone is for and the game is for the fans.

[tlf]

Best show in a long time.  Here's the TLDR; longer Tecno breakdown:

- Don't panic

- Be urgent (that's a thin line of distinction!)

- DT pointing out how we have some winnable matchups later in the year, MOS silent (to the shock of no one)

- Won't speak to the Demski DPI/challenge vis a vis league opinion: league hasn't told him squat yet

- MOS says watch the earlier contact on the legs of Demski on the DPI and more twisting

- Full confidence in Buck.  We do play double TE.  We like the EZ corner fade even though it worked only once this season

- Lucky?  He's available, it's a closed practice, make your own guess

- Rourke?  MOS says he's good enough to stay down south

- The FG/gamble question: wanting to bleed more clock, worried about Grant, worried about a deep pass DPI, WFC always leads the league in 1Y sneak

- Demski mauling in the EZ in OT... he says it's not IC because the ball had been thrown.  I'm not positive on this one, but the angles provided don't show exactly when the ball left Zach.  I thought it was deducible it had not left, but I could be wrong

- MOS goes against what he said in post-game presser and now says he'll "always" go for it on 1Y gamble every time again.  He'd do it again in the same scenario.  "Trust the OL and Strev".  "Always [...] choose not to give the ball back" (in similar SY scenarios).  Yay MOS!  He 100% matches his previous stance and all my recent comments.  I'm in full agreement.  Be bold and keep control

- Sheed: "sure Kyle" has talked to him.  It's Sheeds b-day!

- Short weeks: get rest, give them "just enough" (new stuff?), they want to prove something after a loss


!!!!!!!!
DT spotted a good one!  4Q1:38 Dinwiddie calls timeout... but he has no timeouts left because a couple of plays earlier, well inside the 3 min warning, he had a failed challenge!  Refs stop the game, clearly hand-signalling and whistling and announcing "timeout TOR" and bottle-jockeys come on to water the TOR players.

Calling a TO when you have no TO left is normally a delay of game penalty and the 2nd & long Brady run turns into a free 1st down 10Y closer.  Then we may not be in the Strev gamble situation at all, or the calculus changes because we're even closer for a FG try.

Strangely enough, I can't find this specified anywhere in the rule book.  The only thing close is about throwing a challenge when you are lacking the proper ammo.  Still I think DT is right and if you call a TO without one you also get DoG.

Rule 10 - Replay
Section 6 - Misc
If a coach challenges when not having a challenge / timeout and the game is stopped as a result a delay of game penalty will be assessed.  (10Y)

So I went back to the 3 min warning to see what the TOs actually do, since DT and MOS agreed you usually lose 1 if you still have 2.  And the TSN/stadium screens should reflect that.  Oddly enough, WPG's stayed the same at 1 TO, but TOR's still showed 2 TO right up to when TOR challenged at 4Q2:18.  Then during the challenge TSN changes the chyron to show TOR only has 1 TO!  Doh... they realized their mistake.  Then when command announces the verdict, they (correctly) set TOR to 0 TOs.

At 4Q1:38 TOR then calls a TO that they clearly do not have.  A few seconds after that  there are 2 more strange whistles that don't usually occur.  They are not the blow-in whistle.  I think this is the refs realizing their mistake and trying to fix it.  However, DT is right: it shouldn't matter if the refs correct Dinwiddie... by the simple act of him calling for a TO they should be penalized.  This ref AND command mistake may have also cost us the game.  So many little things all game and if any single one goes our way we win, yet they all went against us.

Nerd DT and nerd Tecno would get along real well, methinks.

You def would get along with DT!

My eye opening moment of the show along with him chatting nicely with the older gentlemen (I love that!), was him saying he likes the guys he already has..in response to bringing in Bailey.  I don't know if that means he doesn't want to, or he's trying to brush off the question, but I was a bit discouraged by that.  I'd love Rasheed in just for his energy alone..and his blocking.

It was a great show last night.

[Jesse]

Best show in a long time.  Here's the TLDR; longer Tecno breakdown:

- Don't panic

- Be urgent (that's a thin line of distinction!)

- DT pointing out how we have some winnable matchups later in the year, MOS silent (to the shock of no one)

- Won't speak to the Demski DPI/challenge vis a vis league opinion: league hasn't told him squat yet

- MOS says watch the earlier contact on the legs of Demski on the DPI and more twisting

- Full confidence in Buck.  We do play double TE.  We like the EZ corner fade even though it worked only once this season

- Lucky?  He's available, it's a closed practice, make your own guess

- Rourke?  MOS says he's good enough to stay down south

- The FG/gamble question: wanting to bleed more clock, worried about Grant, worried about a deep pass DPI, WFC always leads the league in 1Y sneak

- Demski mauling in the EZ in OT... he says it's not IC because the ball had been thrown.  I'm not positive on this one, but the angles provided don't show exactly when the ball left Zach.  I thought it was deducible it had not left, but I could be wrong

- MOS goes against what he said in post-game presser and now says he'll "always" go for it on 1Y gamble every time again.  He'd do it again in the same scenario.  "Trust the OL and Strev".  "Always [...] choose not to give the ball back" (in similar SY scenarios).  Yay MOS!  He 100% matches his previous stance and all my recent comments.  I'm in full agreement.  Be bold and keep control

- Sheed: "sure Kyle" has talked to him.  It's Sheeds b-day!

- Short weeks: get rest, give them "just enough" (new stuff?), they want to prove something after a loss

Techno broke it down pretty well.

- on the match-ups later in the season, DT pointed out that we're one win behind Calgary, who we have the season series with already, and then after the Banjo Bowl, we have two bye weeks, have three games against Edmonton and Hamilton, and play Montreal in the final game, who may be resting starters at that point.

- On Rasheed. MOS does say that Walters has reached out to the agent, but pours a lot of cold water on the prospect. Repeats he likes our guys. The caller specifically brought up Rasheed's blocking, but MOS says Clercius is big and strong and shouts out Johnson for throwing his little body around with a passion. Also brings up that it would be tough from a roster management perspective with injured guys eventually coming back.

[dd]

Ya, Bailey is not coming back to Wpg...MOS sticks with 'his guys', thats the way he's always been

[Pete]

Ya, Bailey is not coming back to Wpg...MOS sticks with 'his guys', thats the way he's always been

Hes happy with the guys we got and hes not going to admit hes wrong. Despite Johnson having done virtually nothing in 5 games, wheatfall also did zip in his limited use. Clerius shows promise but hes not at the level of Bailey yet, Bailey was also used to diversify running game.

[TecnoGenius]

Ya, Bailey is not coming back to Wpg...MOS sticks with 'his guys', thats the way he's always been

You have to always read around what MOS actually says.  There's certain things he'll always do that are kind of lies / kind of not.  One of these is "I like the group we have"... that never should be read as "we're not looking at Bailey": in fact he came right out and said he's bets KW has reached out!

But it's not a lie because he does like his group.  And kind of a lie because even if he didn't, he'd still say it because he's that kind of leader who will never throw a guy under the bus.

Now, when you should take careful note is when he goes out of his way to say something different and beyond what his normal platitudes are.  He's said he REALLY likes this group and it's the strongest group of rookies maybe ever.  THAT should make you pay attention and believe that at the very least he's not lying that indeed he (at least) likes this group.

[Nic16]

Hes happy with the guys we got and hes not going to admit hes wrong. Despite Johnson having done virtually nothing in 5 games, wheatfall also did zip in his limited use. Clerius shows promise but hes not at the level of Bailey yet, Bailey was also used to diversify running game.

3 catches for 111 yds in his 1st game before getting getting injured is far better than "zip".

Clercius and a guy like Wheatfall could be groomed for Bailey's role. But with that said, I think Bailey would be a bigger help to the O right now.

[Jesse]

3 catches for 111 yds in his 1st game before getting getting injured is far better than "zip".

Clercius and a guy like Wheatfall could be groomed for Bailey's role. But with that said, I think Bailey would be a bigger help to the O right now.

Wheatfall made one catch in broken coverage and ran a terrible route that kept him from getting in the end zone. I'm not saying he can't be good, but that one play didn't show much to me. He's definitely neutral in my mind right now.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

3 catches for 111 yds in his 1st game before getting getting injured is far better than "zip".

Clercius and a guy like Wheatfall could be groomed for Bailey's role. But with that said, I think Bailey would be a bigger help to the O right now.

I think moving Lucky onto the roster spells the end of Bailey coming back, they had enough time to consider a switchover and for whatever reason decided to stick with Lucky.  I would have preferred Bailey for his much needed contribution but didn't really expect it to materialize with so much water under the bridge.

[Waffler]

Demski is in touch with Bailey and he says:

"I talk to Sheed," he acknowledged. "He's in a place where he's trying to figure it out right now. I don't really know where his head's at. I know he wants to play football. I also know that he has a lot of figuring out to do. I'm going to give him space.
"At the same time, it would be sweet to see him put the jersey over the pads again."

 

[J5V]

Demski is in touch with Bailey and he says:

"I talk to Sheed," he acknowledged. "He's in a place where he's trying to figure it out right now. I don't really know where his head's at. I know he wants to play football. I also know that he has a lot of figuring out to do. I'm going to give him space.
"At the same time, it would be sweet to see him put the jersey over the pads again."

Figure out what? How much money to ask for? Where he wants to play? Or is this just a ruse where he's pretending to be making the Bombers wait while he stalls hoping another club will pick him up? If he wanted to be here he would have reached out to KW, not the other way round.

[Jesse]

Figure out what? How much money to ask for? Where he wants to play? Or is this just a ruse where he's pretending to be making the Bombers wait while he stalls hoping another club will pick him up? If he wanted to be here he would have reached out to KW, not the other way round.

Figure out if he wants to take a low ball offer to stay in the CFLor move on to his post football career? Stick around in Canada to wait for an offer that hasn't come yet or fly home?

It's guys life not a video game.

[J5V]

Figure out if he wants to take a low ball offer to stay in the CFLor move on to his post football career? Stick around in Canada to wait for an offer that hasn't come yet or fly home?

It's guys life not a video game.

I get that but Demski said "I know he wants to play football." If that's true, the only question would be, where? It sure doesn't look like he wants to play here.

[Pete]

Rumor is Ottawa, could see why Dru Brown would like him

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Rumor is Ottawa, could see why Dru Brown would like him

Ottawa already has Hardy who plays a similar role to Bailey.

[dd]

I m thinking he either got a low ball offer from KW or no offer at all at this point in time. I m thinking He's probably figuring out flying home vs pay another months rent in Toronto --not cheap.

[TecnoGenius]

I think moving Lucky onto the roster spells the end of Bailey coming back, they had enough time to consider a switchover and for whatever reason decided to stick with Lucky.  I would have preferred Bailey for his much needed contribution but didn't really expect it to materialize with so much water under the bridge.

There's still Johnson's spot.  Lawler still isn't back.  If Johnson has yet another game of doing diddly-squat, there will be more pressure on getting a real player in there.

I don't think this is the end of Bailey in B&G.  But Bailey to OTT is also intriguing.  He'll have to weigh the $$ of any offers.  I'm sure he'd give WPG a "homecoming" discount... but not a huge one.

[ModAdmin]

I'm sure he'd give WPG a "homecoming" discount... but not a huge one.

Pretty sure he gave the team a discount when he signed his last contract here.  Not sure he would do it again, but I guess you never know.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Pretty sure he gave the team a discount when he signed his last contract here.  Not sure he would do it again, but I guess you never know.

Pretty sure he's not too pleased when Walters slides those discounts into other receivers pockets and doesn't bother to contact him after season's end.  Any conversations going on now must be pretty awkward.

[Jesse]

Probably got the Lucky offer, where he'll have to sit on the PR and wait for an injury.

When we should sit down Johnson or move Clercius into a back-up role.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

What the Bombers didn't do speaks the loudest on Bailey. They didn't commit to him financially in the last two off-seasons with the team and then they let him walk. They haven't re-signed him even though he'd be mostly plug in play.

He didn't even make two months in Toronto.

I think we can read between the lines.

[The Zipp]

What the Bombers didn't do speaks the loudest on Bailey. They didn't commit to him financially in the last two off-seasons with the team and then they let him walk. They haven't re-signed him even though he'd be mostly plug in play.

He didn't even make two months in Toronto.

I think we can read between the lines.

The Argos outright releasing him and then crying it was ratio was suspect...you typically don't just release a starting productive reciever because of ratio.  There is more to it...

[Sir Blue and Gold]

The Argos outright releasing him and then crying it was ratio was suspect...you typically don't just release a starting productive reciever because of ratio.  There is more to it...

Obviously we can't know - but what we do know it that:

1) Mike O'Shea is loyal to his players
2) Mike O'Shea likes to reward veterans
3) Mike O'Shea likes players who play tough and do the dirty work

Bailey is ALL of those things and yet, we didn't value him and still don't. Should make you wonder why.

[markf]

I think moving Lucky onto the roster spells the end of Bailey coming back, they had enough time to consider a switchover and for whatever reason decided to stick with Lucky.  I would have preferred Bailey for his much needed contribution but didn't really expect it to materialize with so much water under the bridge.

Maybe Bailey doesn't want to come back to Wpg.

[Pete]

Last year we only signed him when he took a discount, this year we let him go, now Argos cut him. His ego may not allow him to sign here if he has options, especially if we again are disrespecting him ( in his eyes) with a lowball offer or making him start over at a pr position

[blue_gold_84]

Obviously we can't know - but what we do know it that:

1) Mike O'Shea is loyal to his players
2) Mike O'Shea likes to reward veterans
3) Mike O'Shea likes players who play tough and do the dirty work

Bailey is ALL of those things and yet, we didn't value him and still don't. Should make you wonder why.

I think the why boils down to SMS affordability. The team simply couldn't afford him from what I can tell - even in spite of all the good he brings to the table.

It's seems like a similar situation to what happened with a few others this past off-season.

[dd]

The Argos outright releasing him and then crying it was ratio was suspect...you typically don't just release a starting productive reciever because of ratio.  There is more to it...

Ya, there absolutely is more to it. I can see why he wouldn't come back to Wpg, but he didn't get picked up by anyone, wow.

[J5V]

Maybe Bailey doesn't want to come back to Wpg.

I think this is it too. Still surprised Toronto cut him loose.

[dd]

I think this is it too. Still surprised Toronto cut him loose.

So he'd rather not play vs come to Winnipeg?? Maybe that's what Demski was referring to when he said Bailey is trying to figure things out

[DM83]

Bailey is a slow receiver, I assume.
He took on a blocking role and got open in zones and was a safety valve.
I assume the "going rate" for an. American receiver is around a certain rate. However the fricken Bombers are playing nit pro level guys at some positions.  The team is fumbling and stumbling with that Johnson guy and the other guy who was listed as a FB?

It's actually embarrassing to have played two men short. Collaros never threw to those guys after the first couple games. The fullback guy was invisible and that Johnson guy is plain aweful.  He can't catch, he doesn't look fast. You don't have to cover those two guys. Walter's is looking like he doesn't care.

This is where I am thinking the regular season doesn't matter.  Just get in the playoffs. But now with a very disinterested roster, are they thinking they were in the Cup the last four years so the fan base can suck it up this year?

Hopefully this BC series will produce a winning effort. No stupid penalties, a clean pocket, no fumbles, and maybe one deep completion.  But we don't appear to have the speed anyware.

Looking to a nice evening in the warm temps.

[J5V]

So he'd rather not play vs come to Winnipeg?? Maybe that's what Demski was referring to when he said Bailey is trying to figure things out

Hmm .. I never thought of that. You could very well be right.

[dd]

If another team made him an offer, I am sure we would have heard something. Winnipeg's the only team that gave him an offer, but not a great one, so it's play in Winnipeg or retire. Looks like he's made his decision.

[Pete]

its a bit early to make that assumption
even if we've signed him already they may not have announced it as it would be a distraction for today, or hes in negotiation with more than one team (including us) and playing waiting game. With the way things have been going we might be really desperate if another receiver goes down

[J5V]

its a bit early to make that assumption
even if we've signed him already they may not have announced it as it would be a distraction for today, or hes in negotiation with more than one team (including us) and playing waiting game. With the way things have been going we might be really desperate if another receiver goes down

Some delicious irony would be the return of Bailey and Bailey scoring the winning points against the Argos in the Grey cup.

[TecnoGenius]

Everyone think back to how long it took Lemon to sign with someone in 2023.  He was needed and wanted by many teams (maybe including us?) for many weeks.  But he didn't jump on anything.  Then finally after more weeks he ups with MTL.

My guess is Lemon kept holding out for more and more $$ and eventually got it when a team got desperate enough.

Ya, so maybe that's Bailey.  The offer$ are probably pretty low right now (I think ELC+$20k), and he knows he can wait for more injuries to make teams more desperate.

[TecnoGenius]

He didn't even make two months in Toronto.

I think we can read between the lines.

As a fantasy player, I can tell you that no receiver in TOR has been any good (mostly because of Dukes), at least not across several weeks.  Bailey was getting good clutch conversions for them and decent yards and even a TD or 2(?).  And he is one of the best blocking WR in the CFL.  And he basically never breaks.

So a known quantity that is extremely consistent and no upside.  Vs someone like Johnson here who has vast upside but hasn't proven squat yet.  Johnson might be a Lawler next year, who knows, but he's not even remotely a Bailey right now.  So it depends what you're working towards and what you need right now.

Me?  I'd take Bailey.

[Waffler]

Ed Tait says the Bombers already have the same type of player in Clercius and this is one reason we are not going all out for Bailey. Lawler back soon too. I think the window to sign him here is closing fast.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Ed Tait says the Bombers already have the same type of player in Clercius and this is one reason we are not going all out for Bailey. Lawler back soon too. I think the window to sign him here is closing fast.

I think when they asked O'Shea about it and he answers that "we like the guys we have", he's telling you politely that they don't want him.

[dd]

The signing of Bailey is a dead issue, he's not coming here

[TecnoGenius]

Johnson still not producing much in games.  How many dresses so far?  How many yards?  Take out Buck's fascination with the Johnson hitch screen and he'd have like 2 catches for 10Y.

Lucky clearly has earned a spot.

So is the idea Lawler will be back in a minute and Johnson is the musical-chairs loser?  I guess I could live with that.

Clercius is ok and may be a future Woli, but right now he's not as good as Bailey.  He's dropped some that Bailey would have caught.  And his blocking isn't great (witness all the failed Johnson hitch screens).

[ModAdmin]

As a fantasy player, I can tell you that no receiver in TOR has been any good (mostly because of Dukes), at least not across several weeks.  Bailey was getting good clutch conversions for them and decent yards and even a TD or 2(?).  And he is one of the best blocking WR in the CFL.  And he basically never breaks.

So a known quantity that is extremely consistent and no upside.  Vs someone like Johnson here who has vast upside but hasn't proven squat yet.  Johnson might be a Lawler next year, who knows, but he's not even remotely a Bailey right now.  So it depends what you're working towards and what you need right now.

Me?  I'd take Bailey.

What we need right now is Lawler back and it sounds like he is near ready to return.  What we do know about Rasheed is that the Bombers and now Toronto have both let him go.  He was let go for reason and by people who work football for a living.  These are people who are currently employed and and therefore a reasonable assumption can be make that they know football and talent better than we do.

It's good to discuss situations like this.  But clearly the Bombers are attempting to work in players that they believe have upside and letting them (like Johnson) get reps and opportunities is because they believe, at the very least, they have potential to be starters.  And they have only been playing half a season of CFL ball. 

They know what Rasheed can do but they think they might be able to better with the newer guys.  And we don't know what amount Rasheed is asking for to come back to the Bombers.

So many factors enter the equation and we, as fans, have very little access to these factors.  What we do know is that two teams have now let Rasheed walk and no other team has yet to rush to pick him up. 

[DM83]

Don't players get a minimum salary after a certain  number of years in the league. Then it's prorated by number of games left in a season? Do they get a housing allowance?.  I know sometimes players live together in an apartment or rent a house.

I assume Bailey had housing arrangements with some of the guys, while here?
Don't want to pay rent in Toronto.
Then of course Toronto could have needed to release players to prevent bonus money being added

Or the reality is that he qualifies for too much money.  For his receiving stats, a minimum salary for and entry level contract for a rookie and the same value in the field stat wise is the trade off.  In our case Johnson is the short term solution.  Bailey wouldn't have a spot.  Will Lawlor?

[theaardvark]

Johnson still not producing much in games.  How many dresses so far?  How many yards?  Take out Buck's fascination with the Johnson hitch screen and he'd have like 2 catches for 10Y.

Lucky clearly has earned a spot.

So is the idea Lawler will be back in a minute and Johnson is the musical-chairs loser?  I guess I could live with that.

Clercius is ok and may be a future Woli, but right now he's not as good as Bailey. He's dropped some that Bailey would have caught.  And his blocking isn't great (witness all the failed Johnson hitch screens).

Clercius is 14 of 16... pretty sure that's better ratio than Bailey who is 24 of 31.  But I'd rather have Bailey in that spot long term.  And far better having both Clercius and Bailey in the lineup over Johnson.

[theaardvark]

Don't players get a minimum salary after a certain  number of years in the league. Then it's prorated by number of games left in a season? Do they get a housing allowance?.  I know sometimes players live together in an apartment or rent a house.

I assume Bailey had housing arrangements with some of the guys, while here?
Don't want to pay rent in Toronto.
Then of course Toronto could have needed to release players to prevent bonus money being added

Or the reality is that he qualifies for too much money.  For his receiving stats, a minimum salary for and entry level contract for a rookie and the same value in the field stat wise is the trade off.  In our case Johnson is the short term solution.  Bailey wouldn't have a spot.  Will Lawlor?

There is a min wage for any player, no veteran premium, except that they can ask for more due to being known quantities.

Housing allowance is part of $SMS, but many players find Bomber friendly landlords, or share with other players, and regardless, Winnipeg is a fraction of the living expenses that TOR, OTT or BC would be.

Johnson has been underwhelming so far this year, some seasoning on the PR would not hurt him, and would not hurt the Bombers replacing him with Bailey. 

Johnson out for Bailey, Case out when Lawler returns.  Pretty simple, really.  A Rec corps Lawler, Demski, Wilson, Lucky and Bailey is a pretty solid group.

[Pete]

You are leaving out wheatfall, he showed promise

[theaardvark]

You are leaving out wheatfall, he showed promise

Wheatfall did have a good game.  But he's on the 6 game IR too... after all of 2 games, 5 targets, 3 catches, and 111 yards.  So, potential, sure.  But would you rather have him or Bailey on the field? 

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

There is a min wage for any player, no veteran premium, except that they can ask for more due to being known quantities.

Housing allowance is part of $SMS, but many players find Bomber friendly landlords, or share with other players, and regardless, Winnipeg is a fraction of the living expenses that TOR, OTT or BC would be.

Johnson has been underwhelming so far this year, some seasoning on the PR would not hurt him, and would not hurt the Bombers replacing him with Bailey. 

Johnson out for Bailey, Case out when Lawler returns.  Pretty simple, really.  A Rec corps Lawler, Demski, Wilson, Lucky and Bailey is a pretty solid group.

Josh Johnson has been slowly improving every game as he becomes more familiar with his role, he's fast and elusive and can catch, but he looks to be less muscular than Lawler and Wilson, so not likely to hold up over the long-term.  Bombers need to copy the Riders draft plan the last few years and start selecting some bigger Natl. receivers to compliment the talent already here.  Clericus is bigger, but not in the way Justin McInnes is.

As for Sheed, the Bombers may have been curious but that ship has probably sailed with the re-emergence of Lucky as a fan favourite and the immanent return of Lawler.

[J5V]

Josh Johnson has been slowly improving every game as he becomes more familiar with his role, he's fast and elusive and can catch, but he looks to be less muscular than Lawler and Wilson, so not likely to hold up over the long-term.  Bombers need to copy the Riders draft plan the last few years and start selecting some bigger Natl. receivers to compliment the talent already here.  Clericus is bigger, but not in the way Justin McInnes is.

Ajou Ajou too! What a beast!

As for Sheed, the Bombers may have been curious but that ship has probably sailed with the re-emergence of Lucky as a fan favourite and the immanent return of Lawler.

Agreed. Either we don't want him or he doesn't want to be here. Let's turn the page.

[dd]

I ve been saying that for a week, move on already, he isn't coming here

[DM83]

The Bombers have a bye week. Why would you say he ain't comin here.?? If ever there was a time this would be it.

Like almost every CFL. Player all those guys are really good, or above average.  That's why they are playing pro.

In my opinion, Bailey. Had always been a step slower than the other receivers on the Bombers team, among the imports.  Again in my opinion, he sure looked assignment perfect. We talked about glue guys.  Would he not be. The epitome of a contributing glue guy? Have you ever watched the other teams receivers on a run play?

Enough of that! Prior to the last game Johnson was looking like a fifth division receiver in the local touch football league.  It was great to see Buck wake up and get him the ball. Plus using Lucky, on plays he excells in.  Buck has it going looking at match ups.  Just who in defense is going to cover Lucky and Johnson on flat passes, crossing patterns and Brady pounding off tackle.

Bombers over the hump?

[dd]

Bailey was released a week and a half ago. Mike O Shea has said publicly he likes the players he has, boom, end of story. He ain't coming here unless we get further injuries to our recieving corps. As it is, it looks like Lawler is coming back, and we'll have a least one guy who has been starting move back to the PR. I just don't see him coming here at this point in time

[Stats Junkie]

From tonight's Coach's Show on CJOB

Kenny Lawler will practice this week! Still have to determine if he is in game shape.

Coach O'Shea heard back from the CFL about a couple of items from Toronto game:

1. The play where Toronto intercepted Collaros and returned it for a TD was in fact DPI.

2. The CFL sent out a memo at the end of that week regarding the timeout that Toronto called when they didn't have one. In the future, a delay of game penalty will be assessed in that situation.

[The Zipp]

From tonight's Coach's Show on CJOB

Kenny Lawler will practice this week! Still have to determine if he is in game shape.

Coach O'Shea heard back from the CFL about a couple of items from Toronto game:

1. The play where Toronto intercepted Collaros and returned it for a TD was in fact DPI.

2. The CFL sent out a memo at the end of that week regarding the timeout that Toronto called when they didn't have one. In the future, a delay of game penalty will be assessed in that situation.

Wow.  Thanks for posting that

[Ducky]

From tonight's Coach's Show on CJOB

Kenny Lawler will practice this week! Still have to determine if he is in game shape.

Coach O'Shea heard back from the CFL about a couple of items from Toronto game:

1. The play where Toronto intercepted Collaros and returned it for a TD was in fact DPI.

2. The CFL sent out a memo at the end of that week regarding the timeout that Toronto called when they didn't have one. In the future, a delay of game penalty will be assessed in that situation.

So bush league that the play was not overturned and then a week later the league says oh yeah, we got it wrong during the review.

[TecnoGenius]

Coach O'Shea heard back from the CFL about a couple of items from Toronto game:

1. The play where Toronto intercepted Collaros and returned it for a TD was in fact DPI.

2. The CFL sent out a memo at the end of that week regarding the timeout that Toronto called when they didn't have one. In the future, a delay of game penalty will be assessed in that situation.

Wow.  So... now what.  Say what we all knew to be true already a few weeks later.

That play was the whole game.  Without that play we win that game and are +2 in the standings, not only helping us outright in the W, but also making it easier to xover vs potential 3rd place TOR.  Oh ya, and we also would have still had our challenge and timeout.  What a shambles.

Did the CFL release a public statement or is this MOS passing on confidential material?  Can he get in trouble for it?

I want a public apology like the CFL did last time they robbed us with the CGY "no-end" game.  I also want command center reprimanded, especially since they are now seemingly changing who is running it each week.  I'm pretty sure it was Bradbury that night.  Not like Valesi is any better, but I'm not sure I want Valesi adjudicating anything related to our games.

Now... when are they going to apologize for the SSK fake DPIs?

[ModAdmin]

It was a mistake.  They happen.  Nothing will change.  It was an interpretation of what actually happened and it was dead wrong.  The big question is why the people (plural) in the command centre - with multiple angles and time to review - could make that mistake? They are supposed to be experts in the rules and the final resort in correcting (or affirming) officiating calls. To me it's mind-boggling and unfortunately it arguably had a direct effect on the result of the game.

It would be fair to receive information on what happened with those officials.  Players are identified when they break the rules, are fined or suspended.  Why the double standard for officials.

[TecnoGenius]

It was a mistake.  They happen.  Nothing will change.  It was an interpretation of what actually happened and it was dead wrong.  The big question is why the people (plural) in the command centre - with multiple angles and time to review - could make that mistake? They are supposed to be experts in the rules and the final resort in correcting (or affirming) officiating calls.

I forgive the TOR Demski DPI ref.  It's hard real time.  I do not forgive command.  There is no excuse.  They exist to correct the "mistake", especially when a coach is risking his challenge/TO on it -- then there should be even more impetus to "get it right".  Also, the HC should be allowed to relay to command what precisely they saw (if anything) that they feel is egregious.

The worst part IMHO is when all of us every-game-for-a-decade+ fans of all stripes clearly see the DPI/not-DPI of it and command still gets it wrong.  Just like the refs/command, we all have a good feel for what command calls DPI -- what the standard and precedent is.  When even the opposing fans know command is full of hooey, then you know something is direly wrong with the situation.

[The Zipp]

IMO - they should have released these mistakes days after the game (by the Tuesday after) and posted on social media that they were wrong and even a generic statement about "feedback" given to the officials involved in the decisions.

Ambroise actually seems to think CFL fans are dumb or not worth the time and effort to be up front with them.

[Jesse]

IMO - they should have released these mistakes days after the game (by the Tuesday after) and posted on social media that they were wrong and even a generic statement about "feedback" given to the officials involved in the decisions.

Ambroise actually seems to think CFL fans are dumb or not worth the time and effort to be up front with them.

This is a quick way to get even less qualified refs on the field, tbh.

Why the shot at Ambrosie and the CFL when no sports league does what you're asking?

[The Zipp]

This is a quick way to get even less qualified refs on the field, tbh.

Why the shot at Ambrosie and the CFL when no sports league does what you're asking?

The NFL does a better job of admitting their mistakes in officiating - more details and more timely...we actually have better processes in regards to challenges and command centre we just aren't closing the loop and that is on Ambrosie.

If MOS hadn't mentioned this - how would we have known?  Was something issued earlier by the CFL?  I might have missed it if there was something but I am pretty on top of CFL news.

[DM83]

What is scary, and I do mean scary, is that most everyone posting on the forum knew the proper correct call. Seriously, we the. Fan, knew the correct call!!!

The mistakes and horrendous bad calls by the command center cost the Bombers, and probably other teams, in other incidents.

Basic principles were not applied.

Duh! Any early contact knocking a receiver off the chance to catch a pass is pass interference. That's one of the easiest calls to make.  Oh well, if it doesn't kill ya, it makes ya stronger.  Is that the saying.

On a positive note Bombers defense has  continued to improve. D line and LBs have really played better each game. As a result, so too the DBs.  Woo hoo!

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Wow.  So... now what.  Say what we all knew to be true already a few weeks later.

That play was the whole game.  Without that play we win that game and are +2 in the standings, not only helping us outright in the W, but also making it easier to xover vs potential 3rd place TOR.  Oh ya, and we also would have still had our challenge and timeout.  What a shambles.

Did the CFL release a public statement or is this MOS passing on confidential material?  Can he get in trouble for it?

I want a public apology like the CFL did last time they robbed us with the CGY "no-end" game.  I also want command center reprimanded, especially since they are now seemingly changing who is running it each week. I'm pretty sure it was Bradbury that night.  Not like Valesi is any better, but I'm not sure I want Valesi adjudicating anything related to our games.

Now... when are they going to apologize for the SSK fake DPIs?

I would be more comfortable hearing the names of unrecognized personnel manning the CC, instead of 2 individuals that have a long history with the CFL and probably no real sense of neutrality towards the existing officials. Wasn't there a reason they were removed from the field?  Neutrality being the key word and not just a perpetual continuation of the old boys network in all aspects of the CFL.

[ModAdmin]

3rdDownNation's take on the CC reviews...

https://3downnation.com/2024/08/13/opinion-its-time-for-cfl-video-review-to-be-greatly-reduced/

[J5V]

Wow.  So... now what.  Say what we all knew to be true already a few weeks later.

That play was the whole game.  Without that play we win that game and are +2 in the standings, not only helping us outright in the W, but also making it easier to xover vs potential 3rd place TOR.  Oh ya, and we also would have still had our challenge and timeout.  What a shambles.

I've been saying it for years. The Toronto Sports Network and the CFL will always always always favour the Argos. It's been that way since I was a kid and that was a very long time ago.

If it's any consolation, we aren't the only team to suffer from Argo bias. All teams have had their turn. When we beat the Argos, savor it.

[TecnoGenius]

3rdDownNation's take on the CC reviews...

Meh.  Bad take.  If you do away with command then you get the NFL situation where the biggest games of all can be completely ruined by a bought-off or incompetent ref on a rogue DPI.  I still remember that SuperBowl a long while back where the worst DPI of absolutely nothing rigged the whole game near the end, and no one could challenge it.  I haven't respected the NFL since.  It's a trash league rigged for Vegas where the spectacle is more important than the integrity.  I don't want the CFL to become the same thing.

I am of the opposite mind: make the game more perfect.  Genius was brought in to add all this great tech.  So let's use it.  Let's make it faster (the main gripe) and easier to get more calls perfect.  More cameras, more eyeballs, more tech, more Aards laserbeams, more instant and automatic "making things right".  The key is to achieve this while upping the pace of the game.  They make it sound like they are mutually exclusive.  They don't have to be.

I'm glad to see their last point: have the same dude/dudette running command every week.  Didn't it used to be Ireland was always the guy?  And wasn't it 100% Bradbury last season?  Ya, rotating with Valesi who is a on-field ref some weeks is just dumb.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I'm fine with it as it is. I'd be okay if they got rid of the ticky tack roughing the passer challenges though. Did a hand graze the helmet? Was it forceable? 

[bomb squad]

I don't like the 3-down take. Not even going to bother addressing anything in it. Off the mark by a mile.

I think they're on the right track with the review process. It's not a perfect science and never will be. Just need to keep tweaking it, working on consistency, and improving it. 

I'll keep saying it though, I think the CFL would be well-served by being more transparent with their officiating process. They're still afraid for some reason. Really, I don't think they have anything to lose.

I'd like to see them work with TSN to do a feature on how the Command Center operates. How do they come to a decision? Who is involved in the decision? What are their credentials? I'm sure the head CC ref doesn't work in isolation when coming to a decision. I think that would be interesting and helpful to all. 

[DM83]

Those calls against the Bombers were bull poop. Those replay officials lost games for the Bombers. Say it like it was!  lol!

[Pete]

what id like to see in the meantime is the officials giving a more comprehensive explanation of the command center decision ie  the ruling on the field stands vs there is no interference as the defenders action had no impact on the receiver's ability to catch the ball. or the defender arrived at the same time as the ball.
 Even if its given to the tsn booth much as they are likely currently giving the coaches an explanation,,,or should be.
It certainly shouldnt take 5 or 6 days to do so as it is now
(and would also not subject us to Suitors explanation as he sees it)

[bomb squad]

I have to wonder too if the admission on the Demski call came after the overturned non dpi call against Ottawa in OT 1 of the OTT/SSK game. Perhaps they felt they had to admit the Demski mistake because that ruling was obviously inconsistent with the overturn standard used in the OTT/SSK game? Likely not, but still makes me wonder a bit. Or, do they admit they were both wrong?

[J5V]

what id like to see in the meantime is the officials giving a more comprehensive explanation of the command center decision ie  the ruling on the field stands vs there is no interference as the defenders action had no impact on the receiver's ability to catch the ball. or the defender arrived at the same time as the ball.
 Even if its given to the tsn booth much as they are likely currently giving the coaches an explanation,,,or should be.
It certainly shouldnt take 5 or 6 days to do so as it is now
(and would also not subject us to Suitors explanation as he sees it)

To his credit, Suitor did say that he didn't understand the calls and that there was no DPI there against the Bombers.

[TecnoGenius]

To his credit, Suitor did say that he didn't understand the calls and that there was no DPI there against the Bombers.

Yes, Suitor (or whoever was doing the game) did agree with me & the fanbase on most of the horrifically bad calls coming out of command this season.  Ya, he's been wrong in the past, but doing ok this year.

The calls were literally so bad that even Suits could recognize them as duds!

[TecnoGenius]

I have to wonder too if the admission on the Demski call came after the overturned non dpi call against Ottawa in OT 1 of the OTT/SSK game. Perhaps they felt they had to admit the Demski mistake because that ruling was obviously inconsistent with the overturn standard used in the OTT/SSK game? Likely not, but still makes me wonder a bit. Or, do they admit they were both wrong?

Could be.  I had stopped getting mad by that point but I made the same mental note that "hey, isn't this the opposite of what you did in our various games?".

Maybe MOS sent them some film showing the similarities and the league was forced to clarify the standard, and thus admit wrongdoing?

Me waiting for the league to officially say something about our botched calls:

[TecnoGenius]

They always say they want more explanations from command but they don't want them because it will slow the game down.

Ok, so do this:

Do what they're currently doing, but immediately put the extra details and clarification and justification into a cfl.ca page (game tracker?) as fast as they can (within 3-5 mins after relaying the call to the official?).

Voila, we all get more detail in realtime and not a second of delay was added to the game.  Everyone's happy.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Yes, Suitor (or whoever was doing the game) did agree with me & the fanbase on most of the horrifically bad calls coming out of command this season.  Ya, he's been wrong in the past, but doing ok this year.

The calls were literally so bad that even Suits could recognize them as duds!

Don't be surprised if Glenn Suitor is listed in those the CFL chooses to fine this coming week!

[J5V]

Yes, Suitor (or whoever was doing the game) did agree with me & the fanbase on most of the horrifically bad calls coming out of command this season.  Ya, he's been wrong in the past, but doing ok this year.

The calls were literally so bad that even Suits could recognize them as duds!

What struck me was that even as a huge Rider fan he called BS. He definitely scored some points with me that day because up until then, I couldn't stand him.

[bomb squad]

They always say they want more explanations from command but they don't want them because it will slow the game down.

Ok, so do this:

Do what they're currently doing, but immediately put the extra details and clarification and justification into a cfl.ca page (game tracker?) as fast as they can (within 3-5 mins after relaying the call to the official?).

Voila, we all get more detail in realtime and not a second of delay was added to the game.  Everyone's happy.

Good idea. Or on X as well, which I think Ed Tait suggested. Just the closer calls, not every review. They could relay it during the next break. All it would take is one or two sentences. The TSN announcers would also get that and could relay it to the viewers. There has to be a better connection between the Command Center and the TSN announcers/fans.

For eg. Re review of play at 12:22 of 4th Qtr" "While part of a defenders arm over the shoulder of the receiver may not alone constitute interference, in this case we determined the arm restricted the movement of the receivers left arm towards catching the ball." 

[TecnoGenius]

Good idea. Or on X as well, which I think Ed Tait suggested. Just the closer calls, not every review. They could relay it during the next break. All it would take is one or two sentences. The TSN announcers would also get that and could relay it to the viewers. There has to be a better connection between the Command Center and the TSN announcers/fans.

For eg. Re review of play at 12:22 of 4th Qtr" "While part of a defenders arm over the shoulder of the receiver may not alone constitute interference, in this case we determined the arm restricted the movement of the receivers left arm towards catching the ball."

Adding X is fine, but they have an official site: use it.  Anything posted elsewhere should be on the main cfl.ca site too.

I would also add to the "review notes" stuff they looked at/saw that they did consider and ruled it unimportant.  "We noted a hand on the hip but determined it didn't turn or impede the receiver".  Stuff like that.

When I'm questioning command it's usually like "did they not notice this aspect here?".  Knowing they noticed and why they didn't care (what rule applies, etc) would be great.

[Jesse]

Good idea. Or on X as well, which I think Ed Tait suggested. Just the closer calls, not every review. They could relay it during the next break. All it would take is one or two sentences. The TSN announcers would also get that and could relay it to the viewers. There has to be a better connection between the Command Center and the TSN announcers/fans.

For eg. Re review of play at 12:22 of 4th Qtr" "While part of a defenders arm over the shoulder of the receiver may not alone constitute interference, in this case we determined the arm restricted the movement of the receivers left arm towards catching the ball." 

The weird thing is, sometimes the ref does spell out an explanation in his call, but most of the time doesn't. And sometimes we don't even see or hear them the making the call, they just go on with play without telling the crowd. SO much inconsistency.

[markf]

Deleted... Not relevant.

[TecnoGenius]

The weird thing is, sometimes the ref does spell out an explanation in his call, but most of the time doesn't. And sometimes we don't even see or hear them the making the call, they just go on with play without telling the crowd. SO much inconsistency.

Proulx has always been best for adding a bit of extra info to explain.  Maybe he thinks it'll calm down the boo-birds?

The best ever is "it's a wash".  Or maybe the "IP, defense, they made the offense move" from the Proulx song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=XGLj4b--lXs

If anyone knows what year/game he made that call in, let me know!  He's been reffing so long it could be from 1950   

[Stats Junkie]

From the Coach's show (August 26)

First caller wanted to talk about the game winning single in SSK-TOR game. It was obvious that he had read a post I made on TwiXter but he then proceeded to butcher the facts. Mike O'Shea wasn't hearing any of it - leave the 'rouge' alone.

Rant
As a Canadian football traditionalist who has done an enormous amount of historical research over the years, I find it important to use the proper verbiage in the manner that it was meant. The play in question was a kick over the dead ball line also referred to as a 'Deadline Kick'.

Historically, a 'Rouge' referred to a play where the returner was tackled in the end zone. In game summaries up to the mid-1960s a play with a 'Rouge' was often displayed as: Player A Rouged by Player X on a kick by Player Y.

Terms relevant to the single:
Deadline Kick - ball kicked over the dead ball line at the back of the EZ
Rouge - the returner is rouged (tackled) in the EZ
Forced to Rouge - the returner is pushed OB in the EZ
Kick into Touch - ball was kicked OB along sideline in EZ
Ran into Touch - returner ran the ball OB in EZ on his own
Touch in Goal - we now refer to this as a conceded single. Historically, the returner had to touch the ball to the ground in the goal area to concede a point. The easiest way to achieve this was to take a knee

No Tackle = No Rouge
End Rant

Mid-Show, a caller asked if the officials were graded on their performances (was this Tecno?). O'Shea said that all of the officials are graded on each play, not only for the calls that they make but wider views are used to determine if the officials were in the correct spot to make the calls they need to make.

I'll add, there is a game supervisor at each game who will meet with the officials post game (and perhaps at halftime).

Re: the review of the Tim White non-catch
It was clear and obvious that Tim White did not secure the ball as initially ruled on the field. It was not clear and obvious what happened after that. It could have been incomplete - apparently there is an angle which it appears as though the ball may have hit the ground but it is not clear. It could have been a simultaneous catch at some point or it could have been an interception by Alexander.

[TecnoGenius]

Kick into Touch - ball was kicked OB along sideline in EZ
Ran into Touch - returner ran the ball OB in EZ on his own

Mid-Show, a caller asked if the officials were graded on their performances (was this Tecno?). O'Shea said that all of the officials are graded on each play, not only for the calls that they make but wider views are used to determine if the officials were in the correct spot to make the calls they need to make.

Wasn't Tecno!  I never remember the show is on until hours later...

I love the terminology lesson!  I'll have to save those for later.  I'm curious about the bolded ones... why the word "touch"?  Is there a historical reason for this?

[Stats Junkie]

I love the terminology lesson!  I'll have to save those for later.  I'm curious about the bolded ones... why the word "touch"?  Is there a historical reason for this?

Historically the sideline was known as the touchline.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Historically the sideline was known as the touchline.

Do you know when did the term "rouge" become commonly used again? I had never heard this term growing up following the CFL through the 70's and 80's, but when I got back to following the game after completing university it was a commonly used term, I had to look up it's actual meaning.

[Stats Junkie]

Do you know when did the term "rouge" become commonly used again? I had never heard this term growing up following the CFL through the 70's and 80's, but when I got back to following the game after completing university it was a commonly used term, I had to look up it's actual meaning.

In the mid-1980s the CFL started publishing an annual stats & information book called "CFL Facts, Figures & Records". The early editions of this book also included the CFL Rule Book.

I recall going through the Rule Book and seeing the term rouge for the first time. It was listed in the section which identified the values of various scoring plays. For 1 point it listed "Single or Rouge". It is easy to imagine that someone unfamiliar with the historical use of the various terms would simply associate single and rouge as interchangeable terms - I may have been one of those people back then.

When the term rouge started to work its way back into CFL lingo, it didn't phase me because of what I had read in the Rule Book. I can't give a specific year when it started.

[TecnoGenius]

Well, rouge in French is "red" or even "blush"... what if it's a reference to allowing yourself to be tackled in the EZ is embarrassing and you (should) blush/rouge?  i.e. be ashamed of yourself.

Maybe?