O’Shea drew the worst card possible earlier this week when Nasty Nate Rourke re-entered the CFL.
Bombers were favored to topple “Jake’s the Guy” Dolegala’s team - perhaps as much as 80% favorites.
With Nasty Nate in tow - I’d say Bomber chances drop to 30% - and thats being extremely charitable.
Bombers will also have to deal with a massive BC home crowd of 24,000+, filled with Crazy Georges and the like.
O’Shea was so very poised to get his team to 4-6 and begin a wild 2nd half drive to certify 3rd in west, maybe even higher if the right raindrops fell at the right time.
Now - NOT. SO. MUCH.
3-7 (should BB lose) is lower than anyone envisioned (yes, even me) for the Bombers at 10 game mark. Unenviable position of prolly having to go 5-3 in last 8 games, although an outside shot that 4-4 gets you to 6-12 and a blind pole vaulter’s chance for 3rd in west (assuming Calgary continues to falter and Edmonton doesn’t surge like the dickens)
LBS…don’t be so apprehensive. I know that I am in the minority, but I don’t subscribe to the notion that Rourke can walk on water. Is he talented? Yes. Could he perhaps become MOP? Yes, or maybe. But he doesn’t jump into his uni with both legs at the same time. After half a season, he doesn’t yet qualify to lay claim to be mentioned in the same sentence as Lancaster, Flutie, Moon, Liske, Parker, Jackson, Dunigan, Allen, Calvillo, Ray, et al. He may get there, but IMHO right now, the hype is overblown. I have followed this league in 8 different decades, since 1959, and I have NEVER seen anyone attributed greatness after so small of a sample.
If he was THAT much better than any of his predecessors, he would have stuck around south of the 49th, not withstanding the hurdles he had to overcome there. He played one quarter…3 drives, completed 3 of 15 passes, or something. Sure, some were dropped…but still. Given his lack of reps, I am picking the BB to win.
Much thanks for your well-earned optimism. I’ve been around this league perhaps as long or longer than you. I’ve seen all the greats (Jackson, Ploen, Parker, Moon, Ray, General, Liske, Kapp, Faloney, Flutie, AC, Rote, Clements, etc.), the near greats and the vast lot of wandering mopes.
Rourke is special, no doubt. Does that mean he’ll romp all over Mike O’Shea’s near-stellar defense? Nope!
But he’ll present O’Shea & Younger with a ton of problems they could never have anticipated in their wildest dreams.
Job 1 (for Rourke) - stop the losing streak
Job 2 - generate just enough offense for the Lions so to make it nigh on impossible for the Bombers to match
30 to 32 pts might be enough to stem the tide. Bombers still have holes in their o-line, Collaros has become a bit gun-shy and they are missing their best WR guy - Dalton Schoen.
Can see Lions winning 31-22 and if Winnipeg unravels discipline wise and Zach starts over-pressing it could be far worse.
Ya…I remember all those guys. Didn’t like Ploen, so I included, then deleted him from the list…a list which wasn’t intended to be all-inclusive. One very good friend lives in the peg, and I lived and worked there for a few weeks one summer. Rivalry not withstanding, BB were always my second choice…until they went on their recent 4 yr. tear…after which it was not so much, just because they “had their share” so it was easy to cheer for an underdog.
However, O’Shea has been around the block so many times that I don’t think anything would surprise him. He has half a season of video on Rourke. My trepidation relates to Zach: which Zach will show up? I know that has a lot to do with his protection, but he seems to be more tentative since being eaten alive in those first few games. As for Schoen? Meh. To be sure, a loss, but Ontaria has more than compensated.
Just a prediction, but I don’t see Rourke lighting up anybody in his first game back: a pedestrian 279 yards passing, 70% completions, 56 yards personal rushing, and a 3-point loss.
I’d rather play BC with Rourke at the helm than Dolegala…can’t be scared of playing top teams if you want to be one.
Bring them on…we have a pretty good D.
Psychologically as sports and contests work out more often than one might think,
it can be better for a team on hard times to go knowingly into a tough battle all the more charged up than to into a battle taking an opponent more for granted.
Sure it’s counterintuitive, but many bets on the underdog are also won on such occasions.
I agree, but I am not of the opinion that WPG is “on hard times”.
Ya, our record is crappy. Almost every loss though could easily have gone the other way - in otherwords, we’ve been in every game.
We need wins 100%, but we are a good enough team that I do not fear going into any other stadium. Our D has been playing at an elite level, we just need the O to carry some of that weight, and there have been great signs, with more to come. Buckle up, things are about to get serious.
