Is the Toronto game a must win ?

I think it is, considering the fact we have MTL and CGY after the Argos. If we fall 3 games back of HAM and TOR after game 6 or 7, it may be lights out. We would have to go 8 and 3 in our last 11 games to probably get 3rd in the East.

I think the most important thing is if we do lose what kind of loss it is. If it is as pathetic as last week then "there is big trouble in little China". If it is a good game and we have a competitive looking offense with signs that they are getting better than I think we could survive a loss.

I think that is true if we make the playoffs or not, If we play well down the stetch and have things running smoothly for next year. Even if we finish second, I don't like WPG chances or Ham and Tor chances of beating MTL at home in the East final and then playing CGY or EDM in the Grey Cup.

....this is definitely an important game...division rivals are 4 pointers....but beyond that ..IF this team can't beat the arenogoods...then we do deserve the honour of 'worst team' in the league and let the nfl airlift and player auditions begin...We will have received the signal for the real 'rebuild' to get underway.. :wink: :roll:

If they lose this one too, they will have to fight for their lives for the remainder of the season.

Need the Lions to win tonight. The Fumble at the 1 , has just changed momentum 100% in Hamiltons favour.

EVERY game is a must win.. why bother playing if it's not!

There are some games ,teams can afford to lose and still make the Playoffs. Of course there trying to win every game.

WOW so profound..
I never knew!

Your the one claiming every single game is a must win. It's a valid question concerning the Bombers. If they lose against Tor. is there any way back ?

Don’t think I have ever heard of a must win game in week 5. But, it would stink to lose the season series to the Argos too, so I guess it is.


you win the next game.. then the next one.. and so on.. but hey.. if you feel your team just doesn't have it in them.. more power to the opposition

That was the ugliest win I have ever seen, and I've been watching football for a long time.

You obviously weren't watching the Chicago Bears v.s. Arizona Cardinals two years ago. The Bears don't score an offensive touchdown, they have 4 field goals, commit a bunch of turnovers on offense, made a bunch of stupid penalties, but STILL win the game, strictly due to their defense. That of course gave way to the famous Dennis Green rant "The Bears are who we THOUGHT they were!"

THAT was an ugly win. A lot uglier than today.

But hey, when you're 1-3 do you REALLY care how you win? At the end of the season they don't ask HOW you won, just HOW MANY.

.....IF ONLY ...the offence could catch up with the d....this team could be dangerous...Bishop has showed he can be an asset....he has to have 'more playbook' to work with....that'll get a few more of our receivers into the mix...I don't like the way Kelly is using Reid....too predictable...Our o line also needs work....i expect there'll be a change in the near future....their just not getting it done....To answer the question....'must win'....not exactly....HOWEVER, a loss could've/would/ve put us in a very unenviable position, that being , we would've given the edge to T.O. in the seasons series... :wink:

When you can’t pass effectively (which the Bombers haven’t) you can cheat on the run. Also Kelly’s said Bates and Khan need to improve and they are interior linemen.

As for Bishop, he throws for over 200 yards with a TD with less than a week to work with the offense…not too bad. I think as Bishop learns more of the playbook and as the receivers learn how to make their reads on their option routes they run (and that’s most of the routes the Bombers run) things will get better. That near miss from Bishop to Brock shows me that A) Bishop is able to be the guy and B) The receivers are starting to learn to make the reads and get into the empty slots.

WHEN the offense catches up to the defense…look out.

.....I'M GETTING BAD.....unlike the BigBlue who are getting a smidge better.....sorry MadJack....their for they are (they're) in the previous quote post.....ouch.....back to school...I should know better and so should......wellll you know :lol:

Oh relax papa; your guys squeaked out a win. . . and my pet peeve isn't "their=there=they're", it's "then+than".

....sometimes squeeks can be annoying....i'll take anything right now :lol: and hopefully the squeeks turn into big noises.... :wink: :lol:

LOL............those squeaks today were a heck of a lot better than that thud last week. . .