The only difference, my little friend, is that Warner has actually been a week in, week out, starter playing professional football. Nugent has NEVER been a starter playing professional ball. Warner also hasn't had his knee blown out. You see the difference? Peyton Manning may have only been a starter for one team. But, I hardly think you could argue that he would no longer be a proven starter if he was traded.
Keep a spot on the bench warm for Nugent. I'd hate to see him slip on the grass at Commonwealth, and tear up all that scar tissue in his knee.
Actually, Warner has had many more injuries than Nugent in his career, including a torn ACL that kept him out of football for a year, chronic ankle and back injuries as well. He's an 11 year vet, not much gas left in that tank I'm afraid. Hey if you lost your job to Nate Davis and or Jerome Haywood, you can't be at the top of your game anymore. I do wish him well though, he WAS a great player at one time.
So, are we agreed, if your guy isn't starting come game day, you lose by default. Bragging rights are on the line here larry, and with your confidence in warner, this should be a no brainer for you. Afterall, I'm the one taking the unproven rookie who has never played a down in the league before. But I at least have the wheels to take a chance on the guy.
"Wheels"?? Is that what you call it? I call it blind, ignorant loyalty to anybody that puts on the bomber uniform. I guess Warner only started 18 games for the bombers, 19 counting the playoffs, last year because he wasn't good enough, eh? He only led the bombers in 2006 for tackles for a loss. And you bet. If Warner is a starter for the Esks, and Nugent is a bench warmer, I win by default. We are in agreement. Of course, if Nugent starts, and his knee rips apart again, early in the season, guess what? You lose then, too.
Oh, and you might want to get your facts straight. Warner is 32 years old, and his first pro season was in 1998, with the New Orleans Saints. That adds up to a 9 year vet that is far from washed up. Not an 11 year vet. And his knee injury was back in 1998. I think he's more than proven in the years since, that it is not an issue. Nugent hasn't proven anything, and is a much bigger risk. The Eskies secondary was atrocious last year, and Nugent never saw the field. Even at the end of the season, when the playoffs were out of reach, and the games meant nothing. Nugent dressed for ONE game, and did a bang up job of keeping the Gatorade bottles full for the pros. Ought to tell you something.
No kidding! Avery has never been the same player after blowing out his knee in the NFL. I remember watching him play for the Esks in his first season and being blown away. Now, I'm mildly impressed every time he manages to break off a decent run without fumbling the ball. How the mighty have fallen.
David is a workhorse. He's getting long in the tooth, but he can still deliver the goods on the field.
Don't forget that we're talking about running backs, who measure age in dog-years. For a RB, 32 means you're a grizzled veteran. In the NFL, the average career length of a running back is 4 years, and you are considered washed-up at the position by the time you hit 30.
It's a position where your body has to be in absolute top shape if you're going to be effective.
I agree Avery's initial salary of $250K, in the pre salary cap era, was obscene. And ticked off more than a few Eskimo fans that the Argo's deep pocketed owners would outbid the Eskimos by making Avery more than twice as well paid as any other RB in the league. The only thing that made it easier to swallow was that Avery has never regained his 2002 form, when he was in Edmonton. That, and we got Mookie Mitchell after the Argo's cut him.
However, since then, Avery has taken a 50% pay cut, and my understanding is only making about $125K, which is about what Davis is demanding. It couldn't hurt to bring him into camp, and let the best man win.
Once again, it was the same coaching staff that won the Grey Cup 20 months ago. I know you are a bomber fan, and likely not familiar with it, so I will explain. It is the giant, silver trophy handed out at the end of the season, to the best team in the CFL. Look it up in the record books, and you will find that your team won it 17 years ago. Not all that impressive in an 8 team league. But, the bombers did win it. No really, they did. Check it out.
I realize your dominant bombers won 2 whole games more than the "incompetent" Eskimos in an 18 game season, before choking in the playoffs. But, that's really not all that impressive. What is impressive, is finding a way to go 17 years in an 8 team league without winning jack squat. One would think you'd almost have to put alot of effort into that feat.
Since you want to change the topic, how about 11 - 7 champs to 7 - 11 chumps in the span of a year, now you can add that page to your history book too larry. Enjoy the past because the future isn't looking so bright.
I'd rather have ONE bad year out of 35, than to have 17 years of utter and complete futility, as the bummers have experienced. And I'll make another side bet with you that the Eskimos will win their 14th Grey Cup before winterpeg gets to see it again. Enjoy your memories of 1990. 17 years isn't that long ago. Really. Remember it with pride. It's all you've had for 17 years, and it's all you'll have for years to come.
Wow I thought I heard this in January or February just maybe Larry is doing some reinforcement with a few of the fans. Piggy he does have a point. Heck even Calgary won what in 2001. 1990 is a long time my friend. All you can hope for this year piggy is that the Tiger cats play like last year, the Argos have no offense and the new mix of players with the Als fails. And who knows? :lol:
Don't be so downcast, piggy. You were bound to lose the argument eventually. I mean really, it's a no win situation for you. You are defending the record of a sad sack team that can't win jack squat in an 8 team league in 17 years. You're gonna lose that one, every time.
As for June 28, not sure how little you know about football, but Warner and Nugent will not be playing head to head. They won't even be on the field at the same time. All I know is that an established veteran who was a leader of his team last year, is a far cry more likely to have an impact on his team than a raw rookie that hasn't played a down of football in 2 years.
sounds like your making nugent out to be some pile of crap. hes been playing great, and hes a heck of a lot younger then warner.... u say warners only 32, well last season he played like he was at least thirty six. he broke out in the first 1/3 of the season and got all his stats, then he died and was very ineffective and chronicly injured. so far, the young cheaper non import and what looks to be starting material safety is looking great, and id take him over a burned out import whos almost always injured any day of the week. theres a reason why we got rid of him.... you will soon find out larry
Yeah, and there's a reason we got rid of Nugent, which you will soon find out. I'll take a proven starter veteran any day of the week, over a rookie that hasn't played a down of football in over 2 years, since his knee was destroyed. You say Nugent is "playing great". I find that funny, since he hasn't played for you at all. Practice is one thing. Game time action is completely different. Something that Warner has proven, and Nugent hasn't. As I said, the Eskimos secondary was easily their weakest position last year. And even after the playoffs were out of reach, and the games meant nothing, Nugent never stepped foot on the field for the Eskimos. The only time he put on an Eskimo jersey was one game late in the season, where he did a bang up job keeping the Gatorade bottles full for the boys. The fact that he wasn't able to play on a team out of the playoffs, with a terrible secondary, ought to tell you something. You'll find out soon enough.
thats funny you say that... it was a bad decision by the coaches.... i can think of another example. khari jones was bcs third QB and we got a hold of him. i bet everyone was saying the same crap about him, but he turned out to be a MOP. point is, just because a coach makes a bad decision doesnt mean the player cant play
another thing, all warner has proven last season was he can play for the first third of it. then he dies out and does nothing for you.
warner has played for us in games, and he has shown us what he can, or more specifically cant do. esks thought nugent was done because of his knee and never gave him a chance, so u dont know what he can do....
You know, that's funny you think that. You go on to live in your fantasy world where all coaches and management of other teams are morons, and the bombers can do no wrong. The same bomber management and coaching staff that can't get their together for long enough to win a Grey Cup in 17 years in an 8 team league. Yeah. They couldn't possibly make a mistake.
Warner played all 18 games for you last year, plus was a starter in your one playoff game, and led the bombers, for the entire year, in tackles for losses. That's what the Esks get. You get a 25 year old rookie, that has never played a down of football since a devastating knee injury over 2 years ago, and has NEVER proven jack squat, or even played a down of football, at the professional level. If there was ANY chance that Nugent could play pro ball, his best opportunity was in the last few games of the year last year, with the Esks out of the playoffs. Even then, he was a bench warmer, at best. Not even worth taking a shot on to see what he can do. That that was with a crappy secondary, that has been drastically improved this off season.
If Nugent even lasts the year as a starter, and plays well, then perhaps you can call it a draw. But there's alot of "ifs" in that secenario.