TBURGESS

You're arguing the extreme of the other position and using the exception to prove the rule. Outside of the pass and run to Marshall vs Toronto, Marve has 3 passes over 10 yards in the last two games, with his longest being 19. You're right, he should be allowed to make mistakes sometimes and occasionally throw into double coverage, but he should also sometimes show he can throw a deep ball (20+ yards) and so far he hasn't. Like 17to85 said, he needs to show that soon. Actually, I'm arguing that Marve looks like an inexperienced QB, he's not getting much/any help from his OC and fans expectations are way too high. Marve isn't going to throw a deep ball unless it's called for him by the OC and it's his first read. There have been very few of them called in the 2 games that Marve has started. It could be that the OC doesn't think he can complete them or that the O line can't give him protection, but it's more likely that's just that's the way MB's offense works.

I don't understand why folks expect a QB starting his 2nd game to make good decisions all the time. It's just not going to happen. Marve isn't going to play mistake free football. Nobody plays mistake free football. Sure Marve threw across his body. Everyone knows it's a bad thing because we've all seen it a thousand times in the CFL. Every QB in the league's made that mistake at least once. Sometimes they even get away with it, which makes them try again. It doesn't make Marve a bad QB. It makes him an inexperienced one. Everyone's seen QB's throw deep into double coverage too. Matty was probably right that Marve didn't trust his eyes and threw to the wrong receiver. It happens. That shows Marve's inexperience, not an inability to throw the deep ball. Sure he did missed a wide open receiver in his first game that would have been a TD, which looked horrible, but he's not the only QB to ever do that either. How can folks say that Marve can't complete a deep or even a medium depth pass? He's only thrown a handful of those kinds of passes because the design of our offence is to dink and dunk, not to go deep. Give him some time (A rollout or 10 perhaps). Give him some 1st string reps (Nope 1 week isn't enough). Give him a running game to keep the D line off of him. Let him throw a dozen medium/deep balls in game situations. Then you can decide if he can or can't throw them. Marve is an inexperienced QB, playing in a system that's designed for a pocket passer, that doesn't take advantage of his strengths, that doesn't establish the run, that expects him to complete a high % of short passes, on a team that folds when he makes any mistakes. I can't think of a single advantage that Marve has in our offence.

Let me get this straight. We looked at all the RB's our scouts have film on and decided that Walker is better than any of them? Walker, who Hamilton didn't care enough to keep. Walker who Ottawa cut? That Walker? I guess our new theory is if 2 teams don't want the guy we'll pick them up. Works for both Walker and Simmons in the last couple of weeks.

Bad choice IMO. Walker's best year was his rookie year back in 2012. He's been almost invisible since then. I guess he adds some speed to the team.

One reason teams like to have 3 NI O lineman is because they can use 1 NI to back up 3 different spots. When you use your NI's at say MLB, you need a second NI to back them up or else you're having to make multiple changes when injuries happen.

One guy was hyping Marve as a savior who could take Willy's job. Everyone else said Marve is a option better than Brohm, which is still true. If you force a running QB to change their game to become a pocket passer, you're going to see a lousy pocket passer because that's not what got them to the pro level. They have very little if any experience or pocket presence because that's not what they've done all their lives. If it was what they were good at, they'd already be pocket passers. Marve was horrible when he tried to run MB's offense against Calgary. MB needs to change the offense to fit Marves strengths instead of the other way around. That's probably the only route to success with Marve as QB this year and there are no guarantees that will work anyway. A lot of the problems have to do with expectations. Folks want Marve to have touch with receivers he's only been throwing to for about a week? They want him to be able to throw deep from the pocket when he only gets 2 or 3 deep shots called all game? They want him to stay in the pocket and go through his reads and run when it's there but not too soon while the O line provides him with 2-3 seconds. Not realistic. I'd much rather have Willy at QB, but that's not happening right now and it may not be possible this year. I think Marve is our second best choice. I know he's green and that he's a scrambler not a pocket passer. I know that his accuracy leaves a lot to be desired and that's the top quality I look for in a good QB. I'm hoping they change the offence to allow Marve to do what he does best and that practice will help him get in sync with his receivers. I'm well aware that it may not do any good but it's our only chance IMO.

I feel like you have these mixed up. Their offense is pretty good? I can't imagine you'd be calling our offense any good after giving up 10 sacks and scoring 13 points. The Riders lead the league in total yards per game at 412, so yah... I'd say their offense is pretty good. If they just run the ball at us (They've got the most YPG) and give Smith a chance to simply handle the game, they could easily beat us. If they choose to play musical QB's and don't run the football like they did last game, then they'll give up more sacks and not score many points. We're 7th in total defence at 392 which is OK considering that our offense sucks (Last in the league in YPG at 320).

Calgary makes 2 major mistakes, an INT in the end zone and a blocked punt, they keep playing well and blow us out in the second half. We make two major mistakes, both INT's, we stop playing well and get blown out. It's not just in this one game either. Every team makes mistakes, good ones play through it. We fold. Throw in the towel. Give up. A lot of that's coaching IMO.

I'm expecting a split with both teams winning at home. Our offense sucks. Their defense sucks. Our defense is OK. Their offense is pretty good. Special teams could be the difference.

If they fire MOS, they'd give the HC job to Hall or maybe Benevides.

I'll still take Marve over Brohm, even after last nights performance and that's what we've been talking about.

O'Shea's gone at the end of the year if he can't get us into the playoffs. Not looking good for him right now. Another 25 plus loss at home. I beginning to worry that we'll actually lose to the Riders.

Man Franklin played great for a rookie in his first start. Who gets 300+ yards passing and a TD plus 50+ yards rushing and a TD in their first start? Really close game until the 4th. Two good teams taking their shots. I love that kind of football. Edmonton owned the time of possession, but scored FG's so Toronto could hang in there for a long time by scoring a couple of TD's. The Esks turned the game around when ran that punt back for a TD. Toronto pretty much gave up and got shellacked from that point forward.

That was real interesting. Thanks for the link.

Intersting stats on: http://www.stampeders.com/article/cgy-wpg-preview-150829 (Copy/Paste doesn't create a nice table so I'm just putting the link in)

It's just some competition and to have someone on hand in case Lirm goes down.

Great game for Montreal. Hamilton fell back down to earth. Nice to see them lose at home. Montreal rushed very well, owned the clock and made the most of their breaks. They certainly looked like a different team than they did under Higgins. I wonder if they can keep it up? They've officially got the cross over as I type, at least until we play on Saturday.

I guess we get to see if those who think Picard's no good are right or wrong. I expect that Goosen is a big step down at center. Neufeld at RT is interesting. Don't we have any IMP tackles who can do the job? Will we start 8 or 9 NI's? Gotta say this looks like the worst starting O line we've had all year. Good thing that Marve can run.

The Riders and the Bombers seasons hinge on how they play each other. Neither team's going to the cup. At least one is going to be out of the playoffs, likely both. Our big games are against each other, BC and Montreal. The Riders "GC" game will be the LDC. Biggest rivalry, at home. Ours will be the Banjo bowl. If the Riders win both, they're back in the hunt. If we win both, they're completely eliminated from the playoffs. I'm looking forward to both games as a measuring stick of where we really are in the league.

Yes, we've had a bad run of hiring coaches, no doubt.But you simply can't say - "hire the right coaches", there is no such magic concoction...unless it's a fairy tale book. We haven't just had a run of bad luck for 15+ years. We chose rookie coaches who we hoped would become good coaches. We fired coaches during the season when good coaches have jobs and replaced them with more rookie coaches. That's a systemic problem. My solution is to hire coaches who already know what they're doing, who have a history of winning and not to replace HC's during the season so you have your choice of the best coaches.

But the other 4 teams didn't win the Cup...so they failed..right?What about two years, not winning the cup? Firing offence? And, if you'll notice I did say wrong guy - Burke and LaPo - too soon fired. Those are the only two I mentioned. They are, at least, in the recent past. Nope, the other 4 teams didn't fail. They just didn't win it all. You argument that everyone who doesn't win the Grey Cup are the same is dumb even for you. I'm talking about not making the playoffs and losing more games than you win. Both are hallmarks of bad coaching, bad players or a combo of both. No, your talking about hiring inexperienced coaches, when in reality, all teams do it. And if you're talking about dumb things to say, how about what you said about the Bombers hiring the wrong coaches every couple of years? Show me the book where they list the good and bad coaches, because you seem to have the only copy. We've had almost no success hiring inexperienced coaches since '97. That's the point, not what other teams have done. What we've done. If we'd hired a few good rookie coaches, then I'd probably have a different opinion, but as I've pointed out over and over, we haven't hired the right rookie HC's. Hire the right coaches and they'll stick around longer assuming they want to and assuming you don't have a GM who wants to bring in his friend instead. Book of good and bad coaches? Yah, that doesn't exist although you could make a pretty good book of bad rookie coaches that the Bombers have hired.

Pretty good game. Burris was great. Stupid penalties ended up killing Ottawa. Lousy crowd, but it sounded OK considering how small it was. Toronto keeps coming back in the 4th. Can't count on that all the time. 3 Teams @ 6-2 and 3 @ 3-5.

But the other 4 teams didn't win the Cup...so they failed..right?What about two years, not winning the cup? Firing offence? And, if you'll notice I did say wrong guy - Burke and LaPo - too soon fired. Those are the only two I mentioned. They are, at least, in the recent past. Nope, the other 4 teams didn't fail. They just didn't win it all. You argument that everyone who doesn't win the Grey Cup are the same is dumb even for you. I'm talking about not making the playoffs and losing more games than you win. Both are hallmarks of bad coaching, bad players or a combo of both.

We get in this situation not because we fire guys every couple of years, but because we hire the wrong guys every couple of years. It's make the playoffs or look for another HC at the end of this year and making the playoffs isn't looking probable right now.What you're saying is that there are 8 teams every year who have hired the wrong guy.And how the hell do you know you're hiring the wrong guy? Oh, that's right, according to you, we have to hire an experienced Coach. Or a re-cycled coach. But if they're any good, wouldn't they be employed? And isn't every HC who is hired, new at some point? Yes, sometimes we hire the wrong guy...hello Mr. Burke. But we do fire way too soon also...hello Mr. LaPolice. Just when it looked like LaPo was beginning to figure it out, we had to fire him, because, you know, he was new, and we haven't won in so long....well, you know how it is. Hire and fire...that's what we do. Perfarful. No. I'm not saying that 8 teams every year hire the wrong guy. The 3 teams who don't make the playoffs probably have though. Every HC was new at some point, but we've only hired one newbie since 1997 that has a winning record and we fired him to bring in Mike Freak'n Kelly. That's probably the only time we fired an HC too soon though. A valid argument could be made that we fired Richie too soon back in '04. You wanted more of Burke or PLAP or Kelly or Daley or Hoffman or Reinbold? I guess you have a stronger stomach for losing than I do.

We get in this situation not because we fire guys every couple of years, but because we hire the wrong guys every couple of years. It's make the playoffs or look for another HC at the end of this year and making the playoffs isn't looking probable right now.