Eternal optimist

Agreed, using your example they likely wouldn't confirm or deny the Riders - or any other CFL team for that matter, was under investigation. Logic would dictate that it'd be done that way in order to prevent the investigation from becoming compromised. I find the idea that BLM would be concerned or knowledgeable about anything the Riders were doing in practice farfetched. As a CFL QB he's got enough other stuff such as studying film practice etc. to keep him busy that would prevent him from being a Magnum PI on the side.

Any time of year is a good time to not be in Saskatchewan.

Based on this definition - won't the RF forum ban every forum user and self-implode?

2016 Saskatchewan Roughriders - proudly above league rules and below .500.

Agree with this. It would seem the current mantra around here is "if you don't have anything nice to say...rip on Saskatchewan. That said, cheating is cheating and there's no reason any team should be allowed to play - or for that matter practice - above the rules.

It still ended up being a 'free play' as they call it... just so happened to be a fumble instead of the typical deep throw without any risk. Thankfully the refs made the right call and we didn't end up with a turnover during a critical time in the game.

Going into a bye week or not, I'll take any winning streak the Blue and Gold can get.

You're right, there is always room for improvement and if it weren't for that offsides call that fumble could've been a disastrous turning point for the Bombers. I think it was 13-10 at that point and the turnover would've given Toronto some momentum. That said, I would argue the OL had a good night if for no other reason than they didn't give up a sack. I know that's not always a fair indicator of the O-lines performance, arguments could be made that they gave up more sacks with Willy in (because he hung on to the ball too long). Given the play of the OL the last few years I thought they helped control the run game and really helped grind down Toronto's D especially when they had the big lead. I also agree about Harris - he's a beast and has consistently played well this year.

I believe that was Goosen, OL had a really good game tonight.

Agreed, it doesn't make sense to have Willy on the bench considering how much we're paying him. Hopefully Willy is just in a slump and is the real deal, although he hasn't really shown it this year.

The Bombers played as a team and handled the lengthy weather delay like professionals. Time will tell if benching Willy will result in his resurgence, but if I'm O'Shea, I'd be starting Nichols until he gave me a reason not to. By no means is Nichols our savior, his history of play indicates he's questionable at best as a starting QB in the CFL, good enough to be a back-up but you're not going far with him as a starting. That said.. if it's Nichols' presence and leadership that helped fire up the Bombers on Thursday I'd say at least it keeps the rest of the season somewhat interesting.

I too was left speechless after that awesome performance by Nichols last night.

We just need enough support in Winnipeg to justify a second Blue Bombers franchise - that way they can at least record wins they play against each other.

I always find it funny when people bring up the board of directors and their focus on financial obligations. That's the whole purpose of a board of directors! I always laugh when people suggest getting rid of or abolishing the board... it's not an easy task and if people think decision making is bad now, imagine how it'd be with no formal process in place. Reminds me of how during the recent federal election the NDP campaigned on abolishing the Senate. That said, the Bombers have been too bad for far too long... as someone who's never seen them when a Grey Cup (born in '89) I guess the closest thing to them being good was Jones/Stegall years, at least I've had the opportunity to see that! Personally, I can't wait for hockey season to start, not because I like the Jets, but because they're going to be bottom-feeds like the Blue and Gold this year and then Jets fans can stop complaining about how bad the bombers are...

Anyone else hate that whenever the Bombers do well, we give them some stupid nickname ... instead of Swaggerville, Willypeg or Matt-nitoba, can't we just be the Blue Bombers?

Anyone else feeling this is obviously a decision forced upon O'Shea from above him? He seemed pretty adamant that Willy was the starter prior to this, and I find it hard to believe Nichols' play against Calgary warrants a start. Personally I don't think it really matters who starts at QB, only way we beat Edmonton is if they shoot themselves in the foot enough times for us to scrounge some points off turnovers.

Glad we didn't re-sign him. Fitting that he hurt himself celebrating, not actually playing.

It's a home game with a ton of pressure on the team... I think we've got a chance if our D steps up. As usual, they'll have to drag the offense to a win.

Logically, the only thing I can think of is if it is an attempt to build confidence and possibly cohesiveness within the O-line as a whole? I agree though that it does seem odd.

Why stop there? Amend the rules and double the value of all points scored in the 4th quarter...we'd be unstoppable!

I can understand why even if they have the option, they may elect not to talk to Willy in the middle of a play, there's enough going on as is. That said, this makes the poor time management we've seen so far this season even less excusable.

This could make for an entertaining half-time show.

They'll probably want to look at the film first before deciding to can O'Shea if there's a blow out.

Agreed, it always bugged me how they let the coaches/players creep onto the field. Flagging the coaches for it once in a game would likely cause the coaches to back off. Obviously with things being called the way they are, coaches feel that complaining to the refs is helping their team, otherwise they wouldn't do it in the first place.

I don't think that would work, turnovers affect the game regardless of where they happen on the field. Also, if you had a rule like that, you have the added issue of determining whether a play was within 20 yards of the endzone (example: A play happened on the 21 yard line, or was it on the 20?) which would just add to the confusion and possibly cause challenges to take even longer. I'd be okay if they scaled back the use of challenges entirely. If they're going to allow for challenges, they need to do a better job of relaying that information to the home crowds at games and the commentators in the booth. Often it seems there's downtime where everyone is just standing around and nobody knows what is happening or what (if anything) is under review. It just looks plain bad when that happens...