Luke Willson goes off on the CFL..

[Blueforlife]

Agree we should get stats on butt's in the stands, I always try to estimate it.  Would be nice to know.

[GOLDMEMBER]

Plus Willllson  has a super punchable face to boot. lol

[theaardvark]

OK, Wilson watched our game last night, and if you delete his first tweet, you'd think he was actually Canadian and had played CFL ball...

Luke Willson@LWillson_82

As my esteemed colleague has pointed out. Tonight was an absolute ELECTRIC FACTORY ⚡️. This is what the CFL is at times!! To add more context to some of the numbers Dustin has below, not only were there minimal QB sneaks, barely any penalties, but also the game featured 11 explosive pass plays (15+ yards), 7 explosive runs (10+) both teams had 100% scoring efficiency in the RZ. 734 combined net yards. @ZCollaros7
 was in Godmode. This guy is world class. 83% completion percentage. Plus the late TD he ran in was sick. THIS IS FOOTBALL. GREAT FOOTBALL. It's incredible to watch, it's incredible for the league, and it does wonders for youth football across the country!!!

Great product like this will keep the 30+ thousand coming back. Winnipeg is doing it right. They have figured out the blueprint!

Thank you for pointing out those numbers Dustin, and great job on the play by play tonight 🫡

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I'm okay if Luke Wilson thinks the Riders and Argos suck most especially. He might just be a Bombers fan and not know it yet.

[bomb squad]

The predictable damage control.

[wpg#1]

Plus Willllson  has a super punchable face to boot. lol

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

The predictable damage control.

With a gun to the head some people will say anything.  I'd be happy if his comments did not become a focus on this forum and I can get back to not caring about his opinions.

[GOLDMEMBER]

Smells like someone told him to touch up his act or he will get the axe from TSN. lol

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Smells like someone told him to touch up his act or he will get the axe from TSN. lol

Commissioner Stewie defended him yesterday on the CJOB pre-game show, but someone at TSN may have delivered a different message.

[bomb squad]

Commissioner Stewie defended him yesterday on the CJOB pre-game show, but someone at TSN may have delivered a different message.

How so? (Defended him, that is). I didn't hear it.

[The Zipp]

lucas gonna be hating this game

penalties galore

sloppy play

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

How so? (Defended him, that is). I didn't hear it.

Basically he said all opinions were welcome, even if controversial it brings more debate and attention to the league.

[bomb squad]

Basically he said all opinions were welcome, even if controversial it brings more debate and attention to the league.

Thanks

[theaardvark]

Stirring the pot?

Now he's suggesting only 1 Olineman should count towards ratio. 

I get the idea, make it harder to "hide" Nat starters on the oline, and develop more "skill" position players.  But I'd say that there is nothing wrong with hoggies, or their skill sets qualifying them as starters, or any advantage to using an Int Olineman over a Nat other than $SMS and availability. And "ratio breakers" still make better bucks than Olinemen in general.  Top Nats, regardless position, will get paid.

If you have to limit one position to a ratio contribution, you'd have to add in a mandatory Nat starter in other groups.  Which then becomes unwieldly, and again, drives up $SMS for Nats.

I do still think we need a mandatory Nat QB on roster, preferrably dressed as a 4th QB, non-counter unless you have a top 3 Nat QB.

 

[Jesse]

Stirring the pot?

Now he's suggesting only 1 Olineman should count towards ratio. 

I get the idea, make it harder to "hide" Nat starters on the oline, and develop more "skill" position players.  But I'd say that there is nothing wrong with hoggies, or their skill sets qualifying them as starters, or any advantage to using an Int Olineman over a Nat other than $SMS and availability. And "ratio breakers" still make better bucks than Olinemen in general.  Top Nats, regardless position, will get paid.

If you have to limit one position to a ratio contribution, you'd have to add in a mandatory Nat starter in other groups.  Which then becomes unwieldly, and again, drives up $SMS for Nats.

I do still think we need a mandatory Nat QB on roster, preferrably dressed as a 4th QB, non-counter unless you have a top 3 Nat QB.

 

I would much prefer a cap on NATs in a certain positional group like Wilson is suggesting rather than a mandatory minimum on a position where there isn't enough depth.