First of all, I'm tired of the crap writers produce in order to get noticed. It's an absolute disgrace.
Secondly, I must've missed the game he wrote about, because the one I watched was a great game filled with speed, some great passing, solid special teams, and strong defense. It was a tale of two halves which is always a interesting story line to any game. Was it a perfect game? No. But all in all, a great Grey Cup. Not a dud. It can never be the best game of the year EVERY year.
Mr. Cox, was it not NFL enough for you? Perhaps it didn't have oh so tantalizing finish that the past Super Bowl had. However, it was a much, much better game that didn't feature a over 9 minute opening drive designed to slow the pace to a stand still.
Is it a Canadian thing to rip apart anything Canadian?
So the fact that the 22-14 victory by the Calgary Stampeders over the Montreal Alouettes last night was the third Grey Cup dud in a row didn't really seem to matter when it was over.
Third Grey Cup dud in a row? Is he serious? Did he even watch the last 3 Grey Cups? I thought all 3 were pretty damn entertaining. Does the game have to be a double-OT barn burner for it to be exciting? I'd toss this guy in with the ADD crowd that need flash and flare to keep their attention. :roll:
well 06 was a bit of a dud game. i was ion the stadns and had a loss of interest as the game went on. but the 07 game was alright and well this game had no problems to me. burris played a fantastic game, calvillo kept it intersting until the defence got to b e to much for him. i think the game was a good game to watch
It depends entirely on what you're looking for in football entertainment.
If you like high powered offenses doing their thing, then neither last year's nor this year's Cup would satisfy you.
On the other hand, if you appreciate good defensive football, and admire the chess game that goes on between defensive coordinators, then the past 2 cups have been very good indeed, the unsung heroes of those games being Richie Hall and Chris Jones; it was their schemes and their ability to make key second half adjustments where needed that provided their respective teams with the victories (well, that and the fact that last year Winnipeg didn't have their starting QB).
It's always the same story, a CFL low scoring game is boring, while the No Fun League similar type of a game is a "great defensive battle".
By the same writers, Cox, Brunt, Naylor and yes Marty York, etc.....
Now in all fairness, Cox has been very positive of late and has "come back from the dark side". The opposite of Brunt.
I guess people have different opinions of a "Dud". I enjoyed the game last night. Two good football teams went head to head. There were no fumbles, no blown calls, over 300 yards of passing for each QB. Maybe it wasn't a classic, but definitely not a "Dud".
I have to agree. Although anything that comes out of Toronto media can be used to wipe horse crap for all I care! I think Damien just likes the term dud, ironically it describes him to perfection!
I though yesterdays game was great. You don't need high scoring games to have a good football game. Die-hard fans enjoy the strategy behind the play just as much as they do the actual scoring and athletic ability of the athletes. Football is chess match sometimes and that's just as enjoyable as triple OT Grey Cups.
I wouldn't have minded if they scored a couple more TDs instead of FGs, but I wouldn't call the game a dud because of that. I enjoyed watching the game, even the defence. My brother and I laughed when Labinjo jumped about 2 feet in the air to deflect a pass. That's hustle.
Let's be serious... everyone knew Montreal probably was not tying it on the last play of the game.
Again, a close game does not equal an exciting game.
I'm sorry... six field goals (or whatever), ain't exciting... unless it goes along with 6 TDs.
Don't get me wrong... I enjoy defensive matches. But defensive matches are not exactly the most exciting. Enjoyable to watch? Yes. Worth watching to the end? Definitely. But at no point was I on the edge of my seat watching this game. At no point did I yell "WOW!" or "OH MY GOD!!" at any point in the game. Some nice defensive plays, pass deflections, Labinjo and all that. I kept waiting for the game to break open a bit, though.
But for a league that has always prided itself on 'high scoring games' and much offense, last night's GC game did not fit the bill.
Again, worth watching to the end, but not exciting.
I really enjoyed the game, not really high scoring but a chess match with a great defensive scheme by the Stamps. Hey, Cox probably doesn't understand what football really is, 3 or 4 down version, give him a break, just doesn't have the knowledge base.
I've been thinking about what was written in that article. Aside from the obvious attempt at shock factor, he's right. The league has been somewhat dependant on an exciting grey cup for many years (save for the last 3-4) to maintain excitement and interest in the league. The first half of this years GC was better than the second -- more intense for sure -- and the only thing people tend to remember is the last thing they saw. If I'm right about that, the game was a bit of a dud from a casual fan's perspective.
Something is different tough - I don't think that the 'quality' of the GC will have much of an effect on the average ticketholder's decision to support a team next year. It's actually a testament to the strength of the league that it doesn't need a 62-48 final in the GC to keep the fans interested in the game and signing up again next year.
For sure, wild west shootouts are not required by this league to make the GC exciting in and of itself, agree. What is also important to remember is that the GC is much more than the game itself, it's a party where people from all the teams show up in their teams unies. I was there this year and proud to be wearing Ticats stuff and meet people from other teams and proud to have shook Burris' hand at the end when he was holding the Cup as he made his way into the tunnel to the dressing room.
To just talk about the game is missing much of the point about Canada's party. Missing so much of the point.
Since you can not ensure of every Cup game being "exciting" or what the heck some people are looking for, I believe the key is to look after the production of the Grey Cup. Make sure the people at home know they are missing THE event to be at.
I was at the Cup in Toronto last year and absolutely loved it. Maybe more celebration - which is really what the Grey Cup is about like Earl eluded to - of all the players, all the teams and their fan bases. Have TV segments/shows leading up to the game running so the average person can get caught up in it. Out of sight, out of mind, right? Make sure the fringe fan knows they are missing an event.
*I just want to say that my father really enjoyed the game. He's one of those watch the Grey Cup game only fans that kept talking about how surprised he was at the speed of the CFL game and how it was a real fun game to watch. I guess that's why I'm a bit po'd at Cox for that article. I keep talking this league up with my buddies who are your standard NFL fans and then a national writer goes on about a 3 dud's in a row just to be read/noticed.