you saying it's unreasonable to think that an expansion team has depth issues?

No, it's unreasonable to excuse stupidity.

Tino's had a decent 2nd half (very surprised I will admit) but this Ottawa D has been pathetic.  Little to no coverage on the Riders key receivers. And the Ottawa receivers have let down Burris how many times now? You had them RedBlacks!  And ya blew it!  (Overtime pending  )

do or die, on 21 Sept 2014 - 7:07 PM, said:

You know what happens when you coach not to lose.....

 

The epitome of Lapolice and Burke

 

I would've loved to have seen one of Elliot's famous deep balls there like the one that Chris Matthews caught in Edmonton 2 years ago

Holy crap. Thanks Hank.

Hank

Overtime!

Hey look! there he is again! riders must have made a play and stopped sucking worse than Ottawa for a moment. 

Good freaking lord

 

That old hank needs to be banned from football and benched permanently

Ah well, I'll take solace in the fact that the blown call on the RTK decided the game. LOL

FRANK

 

you saying it's unreasonable to think that an expansion team has depth issues?

No, it's unreasonable to excuse stupidity.

 

Oh so you're just being obtuse now with your insistence that only what you would call is the right call? 

 

You make a stop while up by 8 you win, you don't allow the 2 point convert you win, but they lost one of the few dbs that has been a bright spot and the shuffling happened in the secondary and suddenly it's a couple big plays, why act surprised?

I call shenanigans ! LMAO

Bad snap/hold

You know what happens when you coach not to lose.....

Ironically you lose.

We sure are getting our monies worth with this one

This is crazy

Campell playin not to lose,hows that workin? Holy crap does anyone want to win this game in OT?

I like how Suitor praised Sunseri for "giving the ball" well to Allen just before that.

 

 

you saying it's unreasonable to think that an expansion team has depth issues?

No, it's unreasonable to excuse stupidity.

 

Oh so you're just being obtuse now with your insistence that only what you would call is the right call? 

 

You make a stop while up by 8 you win, you don't allow the 2 point convert you win, but they lost one of the few dbs that has been a bright spot and the shuffling happened in the secondary and suddenly it's a couple big plays, why act surprised?

 

Play not to lose all you want. Still a crap call. But hey, if you like it, that's all that matters eh?

Wow, in thirty years I have never seen the kick-out play work.

 

 

 

you saying it's unreasonable to think that an expansion team has depth issues?

No, it's unreasonable to excuse stupidity.

 

Oh so you're just being obtuse now with your insistence that only what you would call is the right call? 

 

You make a stop while up by 8 you win, you don't allow the 2 point convert you win, but they lost one of the few dbs that has been a bright spot and the shuffling happened in the secondary and suddenly it's a couple big plays, why act surprised?

 

Play not to lose all you want. Still a crap call. But hey, if you like it, that's all that matters eh?

 

so you're not reading either? What I said was it was a passive call but I understood the logic. Where did I say whether I liked it or not? All I said was I understood the logic. 

If it's 3rd down do you go for the tie

If it's 3rd down do you go for the tie

probably the way they've called the reswt of the game

Okay Hank, get it done.

....or not.

Hank has looked like a rookie in OT. no turnovers and no sacks, that's your #1 job as a qb in OT. 

There he goes again, old hank blowing it