Leaderboard

TIDBITS - CJOB Special. (Shorthand version) Walters Moving on from Dressler Flanders - want more return ability - will see. Matthews - he’s focused on NFL, but ‘could’ end up here. O’Shea - regrets losing ‘good’ people, football and otherwise. Jefferson will fit right in. Intrigued to see him play. Ultra competitive West. Negotiations- players will work hard to get what they want. Better partnership and communication now. Couture ready? Yes. Gray will compete. No doubt OL can be as good. TC will determine who’s who and where they play. Streveler- expand his roll..still Matt’s team. Augustine - will have to work on ST & protection. Will be competition 2 spots open on Rec. Petermann & Simonize - both improved. Knox to Wilson. Wilson was slated for MLB. Mexican player in camp? Looking at it. Globalization- to improve revenue streams. Likes the big thinking. Nichols knee injury? Into good training. No knee concerns. Wants to be more consistent. Harris - doesn’t know where the money’s coming from when asked of teams signing Free Agents. Brown & Tait - negotiations? Brown brings up a fund for injuries. Tait - guranteed contracts? No go. Pie is too small. Sask. - Tait says it all depends on Collaros...otherwise - yeesh Brown says they’re going to be terrible and hopes they’re terrible.

Top 2 in east! what lofty goals!

delete

Keep the ratio where it is. It dropped from 10 starters to 7 and then down to 6. It should NEVER drop any lower unless the league expanded to 12 or more teams. It is the CANADIAN Football League and it needs to have as many Canadian roster spots as possible. Most domestic leagues around the world have rules for the number of starter spots and roster spots for its players. It help promotes the sport within the country - both from a developmental and commercial perspective. It is short-sighted and lazy to lower the ratio and "let the best men play" as it will discourage participation and development of football players at the lower levels. This will in turn lead to fewer quality players being available to make the jump to the pros...in turn, this leads to demands for a lower ratio and the cycle continues...This doesn't even factor in reduced interest from the Canadian audience with fewer Canadian players in the league. Reduced TV and live attendance are likely to follow.

Deny or Defend Your Inconsistencies Evade Questions,\Hedge What You Say (do not respond to questions about the article) Ignore the Evidence (The article is completely wrong) Ignore the Main Point Insist Loudly on a Minor Point (people won't listen to the other side) Make (Sweeping) Glittering Generalization(subject is still open) Shift the Ground (no longer talking about climate) Talk in Vague Generalities Always claim the high ground (open minded, optimistic.)

What sort of sorcery is this? I have it on good authority that Ambroise can only deal with one thing at a time. This suggests that he's dealing with expansion, Europe and contract negotiations all at the same time. FAKE NEWS!

Here's what Wikipedia says about the Heartland Institute. The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank founded in 1984 and based in Arlington Heights, Illinois, in the northwest suburbs of Chicago. The Institute conducts work on issues including education reform, government spending, taxation, healthcare, education, tobacco policy, global warming, hydraulic fracturing, information technology, and free-market environmentalism. In the 1990s, the Heartland Institute worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to attempt to discredit the health risks of secondhand smoke and to lobby against smoking bans.[3][4]:233–34[5] In the decade after 2000, the Heartland Institute became a leading financial supporter of climate change denial.[6][7] It rejects the scientific consensus on global warming,[8]and says that policies to fight it would be damaging to the economy. The Heartland Institute received $675,500 from Exxon Mobil between 1998-2014, they are just one of approx. 5,000 individuals and organizations that sponsored their "research", since 2014 they no longer disclose funding sources. If you pay them enough money they'll say whatever you want. Can you connect the dots? Here's a fun little chart.

He cited evidence to back up his point of view - where's yours?

"Who needs a QB?" Mike Kelly, January 2009.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the ratio is EXTREMELY important to me. I'd rather watch a team of all Canadians than a team of all Americans. The NFL can have all Americans....I want a league that's about MY country and people who were born and raised and went to school here!!

Well folks, the solution is to rise above any name calling and sidetracking arguments designed to derail the topic and move on. KBF and pigseye have an opinion, and they are entitled to it. They even try to offer studies to back up their opinions. So let them. The simple answer to those studies is to challenge their veracity, which actually gets to be kind of fun if you want it to be. Like Jon Stewart said on his final show about sniffing out bull ****. It took a few minutes to determine that the Taylor study was debunked and his slanted peer review process was a sham. KBF conveniently forgot about the actual study and said the counter-argument "didn't prove what it proved". We called out the Heartland Institute he worked at, and again, he shifts the narrative saying we are sheep who follow big brother rather than addressing the issue of a flawed study. Pigseye to his credit points out a flawed study on the other side, one that the authors copped to when their math did not add up. That is what science is supposed to be about - withstanding disprovability. He then posts the hurricane study, which basically does not say anything conclusive one way or another if you take a read at it. It simply says we cannot definitively tie an increase in hurricane intensity to human involvement, It is interesting that the same study does accept as a premise that mankind is responsible for the rising sea temperatures and that some models show a correlation with hurricane intensity (one shows the opposite, and others are non-conclusive). Hopefully he is not holding up this study as "proof" that climate change is a hoax, but rather the idea that this particular hypothesis is not yet proven and further study is needed. But let's get past the baiting and accusations of "climate deniers" and "chicken littles". Such inflammatory rhetoric serves only to create division - a staple of internet discussion boards. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, just be prepared to back it up with facts, and if called on it, use those facts to bolster your point, or, if your argument falls, have the simple dignity to acknowledge that you were wrong (a real toughy for so many). And if you find yourself proving the other side wrong, spare everyone the gloating - that is no better in terms of keeping peace on the boards. MY OPINION, and it is only mine, is that KBF mentions the "politicization" of climate science because, as he put it himself "It's all about power and nothing about science". Well, that may or may not be true, or is partially true, but wouldn't that apply to both sides of the argument, and not just one? It seems that big oil and big gas have a lot of sway (power) in politics and would like to keep the status quo, and could do so by thwarting efforts to decry their system as one that is destroying the planet. I have a motivation for accepting the 97% who say climate change is real, strongly influenced by mankind, and that significant changes are needed to avoid dire consequences - I am concerned about the future planet I leave for my kids. I am no scientist, but I have noticed an increase in extreme weather, and when I am told the last ten years have all been the hottest ever record (or 9 out of 10, if I have misquoted the result I admit my mistake - it is not meant to deceive). I wonder KBF, what is your motivation, beyond offering a counterpoint? You call it a scam, one designed to take your money and take power. Power from whom? Those who have it now? Would they not be equally motivated to post studies to keep them in power? And is your personal money more important than having an inhabitable planet, when 97% of the consensus says this is the crisis we are facing? Anyway, we can see where the thread has gone, and I enjoy a healthy debate and don't want to see another thread locked down, so let's get back to tackling the issue and not each other. If someone tries to switch the topic when questioned, and one re-asking of the question does not elicit a desired response, let's all just move on. By the way, here is a counter piece on Karl Zeller. Seems he and his co-researcher used false names when publishing their study, and when outed, pulled the study. They offer an explanation for why they did, which fits KBF's explanation that they had to use false names because of the perceived bias of their work as contrarians. Sadly, their explanation talks about the rejection of their earlier works and manuscripts because of bias, yet we don't have those earlier works to determine if their findings were flawed or not, so we'll never know (from Zeller, anyway) if that rejection was based solely on his stance, or some flaw in his research. One would hope his work would stand on its own with provable scientific merit. The piece offers other examples of where this pseudonym practice was done, and I think it is important to recognize the rationale and not just dismiss it, and the value of double-blind studies. I also note that a NASA researcher also points out the flaw in the study itself, not just the questionable (to them) tactics of hiding behind a different name. THAT is what science should be - ignore the author, challenge the findings. This NASA researcher claims that a too simplistic mathematical model with too few data points is used, and fudged some numbers regarding Mars to make it fit the model. So I can appreciate that the article is not just an attack on the man but points out flaws in his scientific model (at least according to the researcher). Would have preferred a more thorough rebuttal if there were grounds to do so Here is the entire article, a good read to give some perspective on both sides: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/09/19/scientists-published-climate-research-under-fake-names-then-they-were-caught/?utm_term=.86d3367f1826 So let's all be vigilant, and challenge the findings and not just each other, and be clear on our motives when asked. Galileo was imprisoned for his belief that the world was round and revolved around the sun, but did not back down from his scientific claims in the face of establishment religious and political pressure. Maybe we can all aspire to the same conviction and back up our beliefs with solid evidence and not derail topics with simple rhetoric. Namaste!

I could be very wrong when I say this and I know it's the CANADIAN football league but lowering the ratio isn't a bad thing at all. I'd much prefer to see great competition in camp,have the best product on the field if it means an international takes a nationals spot.

Holy **** is this irresponsible to tweet. He musthave stock on Boeing’s competitors.

The Leafs were booed at home yesterday. I'm shocked (SHOCKED!!) the Leafs "national" media is not calling them out on it.

Same. The offsides play was lame, but brilliant at the same time. Id give an honorable mention to mike sellers. 2 years, incredible blocking as an up back and constantly making the tackle downfield. His blocking was phenomenal. He was kind of a two way teams guy, a mix of rogers and cvetkovic. Give me sellers as an upback, cvety as a holder, miller to be the ham n egger, and rod hill to make some big plays.

According to Matthew Scianetti of TSN, who covered the last CFL-CBA negotiations, the negotiations today appear to have gone very professionally and well.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/football/cfl/cfl-cflpa-meet-first-collective-bargaining-session/ TORONTO — For Jeff Keeping and the CFL Players’ Association, it was a good opening day. The players and CFL held their first collective bargaining session Monday. The two sides are scheduled to meet again Tuesday. "It was a good day, it was productive," said Keeping, the CFLPA president. "We had a very thorough discussion. "This was more about introducing the two groups and laying the groundwork for how we’re going to move forward." The present agreement is scheduled to expire in May before the start of training camp. That leaves the two sides with roughly two months to reach a deal. "Yeah, we have enough time," Keeping said. "We just need to get the groups together and keep working." Senior advisor Ken Georgetti and executive director Brian Ramsay led the union into Monday’s talks as chair and vice-chair, respectively. Keeping, second vice-president Solomon Elimimian, third vice-president Rolly Lumbala, treasurer Peter Dyakowski and player reps John Bowman (Montreal Alouettes), Bear Woods (Toronto Argonauts) and Chad Rempel (Winnipeg Blue Bombers) rounded out the CFLPA’s unit. Ramsay said it’s important active players be involved in bargaining. "This is an agreement that’s a player’s agreement," he said. "The more players are a part of that, I think that’s a better thing for everybody involved and we’re going to continue to approach it that way." The CFL’s bargaining team is again led by Stephen Shamie, the league’s general counsel. Shamie was an integral figure in the 2014 talks with then commissioner Mark Cohon. CFL commissioner Randy Ambrosie is expected to participate in the opening bargaining sessions. Rounding out the league’s player-relations committee are: Scott Mitchell (CEO, Hamilton Tiger-Cats); Roger Greenberg (co-owner, Ottawa Redblacks); Rick LeLacheur (B.C. Lions president); and Wade Miller (Winnipeg Blue Bombers president/CEO). League representatives didn’t speak after Monday’s session. Neither Keeping nor Ramsay would divulge specific details regarding Monday’s discussion. All Ramsay said was the two sides spent time face-to-face as well as in their respective groups. "We won’t be going into any details," Ramsay said. "But the points we’ve talked about before (still) remain important to the players. "This was a productive start and we’re looking forward to coming back and talking (Tuesday). That’s a positive thing." The two sides will also determine Tuesday when and where talks will resume. The expectation is the next round of bargaining will shift to Vancouver. This marks Georgetti’s first collective bargaining experience with the CFLPA, which he joined in 2016. But Georgetti is a former president of the Canadian Labour Congress and has over 35 years of labour relations experience. Georgetti was elected vice-president of the British Columbia Federation of Labour in 1984 and two years later became the organization’s youngest-ever president. He’s an Order of Canada recipient and was the longest serving president in CLC history. Keeping is in his second CBA negotiation, participating in 2014 as a CFLPA executive member. Be it in football or labour talks, Keeping said past experience is always beneficial. "It was a good experience and I’ve learned from it and take some of that into this," he said. "You can learn from wins and losses." Keeping said Monday was also about the two sides trying to establish lines of communication. "We’ve got two groups that are extremely passionate about our game and who both feel a shared responsibility to get a fair agreement," he said. "That (communication) is something we’ve been working on as an Association with Randy since he’s come into his position, just improving and keeping lines of communication. "I think that will help as we go through bargaining."

You're welcome. I don't post for those that ignore the science, only for those that want to read. It's amazing how many recounts climate deniers want. Same as Anti-Vaxxers and flat-Earthers.

I made the mistake of reading that post above. 🙄 http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/02/14/james-taylor-misinterprets-study-by-180-degrees/

Also... https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/sabres-jack-eichel-suspended-two-games-illegal-check-head/

Here are the bios: CFL all-stars first awarded in 1962. Most Outstanding Lineman first awarded in 1956 and included defensive linemen, Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman first awarded in 1974. Lou Adelman – 9 seasons (1930-37, 41), 3 Grey Cup appearances (1935, 37, 41), 2 time Grey Cup champion (1935, 41), also was club’s manager in 1937-38, and 1945. John Bonk – 195 games (#6 in club history) in 13 seasons (1973-85), 4 time divisional and 4 time CFL all-star (1982-85), 4 time team nominee Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman (1979, 82-84), Western Division Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman (1983), CFL Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman (1984), played in 195 consecutive games as a Blue Bomber at centre, was involved in every single offensive play (including punts) for the Bombers in 1984, Grey Cup appearance and champion in 1984, CFL Hall of Fame Paul Desjardins – 96 games in 6 seasons (1965-70), Grey Cup appearance in 1965, no bio available George Druxman – 111 games in 9 seasons (1955-63), divisional all-star in 1956, 5 Grey Cup appearances (1957-59, 61, 62), 4 time Grey Cup champion (1958, 59, 61, 62), after retirement he ran the Pembina Hotel with his family. Bob Swift – 112 games in 7 seasons (1971-77), 4 time divisional all-star (1971-74), and 3 time CFL all-star (1971, 72, 74), 2 time team nominee Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman (1974, 77), started his career as a fullback in BC and rushed for over 1,000 yards in his rookie year before breaking his leg and converting to the o-line Mel Wilson – 9 seasons (1937-42, 45-47), 3 time divisional all-star (1941, 46, 47), 8 Grey Cup appearances (1937-39, 41, 42, 45-47) and 2 time Grey Cup champion (1939, 41), also head coach at St. John’s high school and a referee, won amateur trophies in golf, racquetball, curling and ballroom dancing

Time : Tuesday 7, TSN3 Stats : 41-19-8 @ 40-24-4

That's a pretty important statement considering it's contrary to AGW theory and what we hear in the mainstream media. Until the data supports the theory, it's still just a theory. I enjoyed your post btw.

We couldn't sign Stone for $9.5M. Closer to $11M - $11.5M. I'm not sure you can say the fanbase is sustainable. I'm sure, like most non-traditional hockey markets, it will ebb and flow with the team's success. They could easily face a tough match up this spring and be outed in the first round. The shine will wear off.

This is the conservative playbook- I remember seeing something like this from a conservative think tank... I wanna say... Rove? Anyways- it's funny, because this isn't a liberal viewpoint- it's ******* science. Not sure why this needs to be political. Hmmm, looks like I was wrong about the Karl Rove penned tactics- it seems it's unknown: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-karl-rove-write-tactics-conservative-blogging/ But it pretty much what you are talking about:

I know you think it's worthwhile to respond, but it is not returned in kind. So why bother. once again we are no longer discussing the subject of the thread. Simple solution: if we all stop responding, the thread will not get locked.

You are not a sensible realist- you just parrot misinformation and spread lies (inadvertently it seems). You make erroneous equivalences between fact and disinformation. I am not sure if you are trying to muddy the waters here- but you should use credible sources if you want to discuss this serious issue.

Not everyone was a bad player when the line sucked.

I'd argue the only American players we can't seem to find with the same success as other teams is at receiver. We do a pretty good job digging up DB's (Walker, Alexander), LB's (Santos-Knox), even RB's (Marshall, Flanders) since Walters took over.

Sounds like jets are still high on him and want him back here

He got booed last night, too! I'm sure it must've been a bunch of Islanders fans masquerading in Leafs jerseys at the game, though. They got thoroughly waxed at home. And it was a treat to watch the highlights.

The emotionally charged posting is comical, especially when it involves telling others to watch closer. Your chicken little hyperbole is mired in ignorance, seemingly of the wilful variety. And the lack of posting any stats whatsoever would indicate you should take your own advice. Of Scheifele's 32 goals, 23 are EV. Of his 43 assists, 29 are EV. Of Wheeler's 19 goals, 15 are EV. Of his 64 assists, 37 are EV. Of those 158 combined points, 104 are EV (65.8%). In other words, nearly 2/3 of their combined production takes place at even strength. This while having a revolving door of wingers opposite Wheeler. Nobody will argue the forwards are not playing as well defensively as last season* but the notion the top line has been terrible is absolute nonsense. It's almost like the rest of league took notice of how good the Jets are after a record campaign and now they have a bigger target on their backs. Imagine that. Go ahead and dump on #55 but he's still on pace for a career season. In the last two months (Jan. 10 - Mar. 10), Scheifele has played 26 games. In that span, he has 9 goals (7 EV, 2 PP), 13 assists (11 EV, 2 PP), for 22 points, with a 14.3 S%. Granted, he's a -2 during that span, so there's no doubt he's struggled. My one "gripe" with him, if there is one, is this: faceoffs. He'll need to be better come the playoffs, along with his linemates and teammates, but to suggest he's been terrible is a disingenuous overreaction. * (worse than last season =/= terrible)

Leafs “national media” is Fox News.

But, but, but..... Tavares got booed in New York.

I recently flew in the 737 max 8, and absolutely loved it. The amount of overhead space was way more than any other plane I've been on, the seats were super comfy, and the entertainment system upgraded. Totally worth the risk!

Miller definitely did alot for us on STs. However, I'd also argue the stability Rempel has provided in recent years is just as important. A long snapper is a thankless job, the only time you get recognized it when you screw up...

Made Ovi a non factor that's for sure. I'm more concerned with our PK than our PP especially heading into crunch time.

Invariably turns out to be a waste of time. I stopped doing it. I did read your article though, thanks for that.

Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem. The survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims. According to the newly published survey of geoscientists and engineers, merely 36 percent of respondents fit the “Comply with Kyoto” model. The scientists in this group “express the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause.” The authors of the survey report, however, note that the overwhelming majority of scientists fall within four other models, each of which is skeptical of alarmist global warming claims. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#2c7e8a724c7c

Yup, just make the damn playoffs then do some damage.

imagine having an ego so delicate

I nominate the quoted statement for most absurd post in the history of this site. EDIT..... and Riderfans.org. "absurd" : Contrary to reason or propriety; obviously and flatly opposed to manifest truth; inconsistent with the plain dictates of common sense; logically contradictory; nonsensical; ridiculous; silly.

So he doesn't want to go to Buffalo but how would Antonio Brown feel about Winnipeg?😀

BC - As Mike Reilly looks to reinvigorate the Lions’ fan base, the early results are encouraging with the team reporting its largest season ticket renewal rate since 2012 (Ed Willes, Vancouver Province). Calgary - Despite the Stamps losing a number of key pieces this off-season, odds-makers agree that Calgary remains the early-2019 Grey Cup favourite (Justin Dunk, 3 Down Nation). Winnipeg - Bombers GM Kyle Walters says Canadian receivers Daniel Petermann and Rashaun Simonise could make a strong push for more playing time next season (Ed Tait, BlueBombers.com). – If the Bombers opt to start a third American O-lineman in Manase Foketi, the club is well-equipped to start three Canadian receivers (John Hodge, 3 Down Nation). Ottawa - Rick Campbell says Dominique Davis is 1-A and Jonathon Jennings is 1-B as the team prepares for an open competition for the starting quarterback job (Tim Baines, Ottawa Sun).

Hill made the spectacular plays like blocking 8 punts but Miller did the grunt work pn every play. He sacrificed his body to get in there & make the tackle. Fans respect that type of diligence & hard work. Miller got my vote as well.

I hope Nelson either makes it big with the club or is cut early, so I can forget about him completely or have a better frame of reference for him, because right now I hear that name and all I can think is: