saskatchewan vs montreal score

I don't get the game. can somebody tell me the score

16-7 for the Riders :rockin:

I loved Marcel's "Flat out awful" offense, I see he's still perfecting taking any type of creativity out of the gameplan that he started when he was with the Riders a couple of seasons ago.

I never payed that much attention to him when he was with the riders but now I can see what rider fans were complainig about.

out pass left
out pass right
out pass left
out pass left......(Tried to fool them)

Give the play calling back to AC!

Have fun with that! snicker

He overstayed his welcome in Riderville.....

It was among a few reasons why I figured the Als would really struggle this year. The other thing that stood out to me was Popp taking the Head Coach position while retaining all his other 37 responsibilities as well, perhaps even take on a few more.

For a guy who has very little head coaching experience in this league ,I think he just has a huge ego he needs to stroke because he can't possibly do all his duties properly. If he's just delegating stuff to other people, why not just give them the position?

Either way, if you've never watched a Marcel led offense before it's all short sideline stuff and it works OK if you score first because it kills the clock so much. Notice how even a drive of half the field or so took 5 or 6 minutes off the clock only to punt at midfield.

I never payed that much attention to him when he was with the riders but now I can see what rider fans were complainig about.

out pass left
out pass right
out pass left
out pass left......(Tried to fool them)

Give the play calling back to AC!

It's not his fault. Somebody just slipped him the Ti-Cat playbook for the last two years. (I love it!)

Pretty boring game from my perspective (especially after attending the Eskimoes game last night!) Rider's defence played well, and the offence at least put a TD up, but hardly a resounding victory.

Still, Riders won, so I'll rest content for now. We'll see what the coming weeks bring.

On the road in wet and slippery conditions with no turnovers, it's a start anyways :slight_smile:

Are you expecting a 400 yard passing game with conditions like that?

Great game for the Rider D. Looks like the Als have some work to do, 1 point on offense is truly mind numbing :roll:

[quote="jman_135"][quote="greenNope. But I also had to listen on the radio (over dial-up, which cut in and out), so I probably don't have a clear picture of just how bad it was.
More than anything, like a lot of others, I find high-scoring, back-and-forth games more entertaining. In that regard, it's hard to measure up to last night's game.
As for waiting to see what the coming weeks bring, that was my concession to the weather. It's hard to get an accurate picture of how good the O is when they're facing bad conditions - apparently really bad conditions.

Okay, I'm going to blame that gibberish at the beginning of my last post as a dial-up problem, too. Boy, I wish we could get highspeed out here in the country!

It definitely didn't live up to last night's game, but it was still pretty good. The Saskatchewan defence was awesome. How many sacks did they get, 3 or 4? Another 3 or 4 interceptions.

Joseph was looking kind of shaky to me at first, but he definitely played better as the game went on. Maybe I'm just not used to a QB rushing so much.

The Montreal offence didn't even show up for the game... :lol: Only 1 point for them... and should they have even gotten that point? Why do you get a point if the ball goes through the end zone? :expressionless: :stuck_out_tongue:

It's a CFL thing - called a rouge. It also applies on punts, but not kickoffs (not that I've ever been aware of, anyway). It can definitely add an interesting spin on things! Oh, and if a player fields a kick in the endzone (without touching it before it enters the endzone) and doesn't run it out (or is tackled in the endzone) it's also a single point.

From what they said on the radio, I think they had 6 sacks, but I don't know if that was official or not. I'm not sure what the actual distinction is between a sack and the quarterback being "tackled for a loss," which the radio announcers seemed to mention a lot. They weren't sure a few times if it was a sack or just a tackle for a loss. Either way, the D played a heck of a game!

Ive tried to say that they should not get that point, Chief, but it will fall on deaf ears here. No chance for a return, but its punishining the D for letting the opposition get so far into the defensive zone.... :roll: I say the opposite should be true, if you get past the opponet's 30 yd line and cant punch it for a TD, then your kicker misses the FG, you dont deserve any points whatsoever , especially on an unreturnable ball.

I’m sort of ambivalent on this one. I wouldn’t be heart-broken if they took it out, but I don’t see a compelling reason to remove it. I guess the biggest reason that I see to leave it in is because it’s one more thing that makes the CFL just a little more distinct from the NFL. I like both leagues, and I enjoy the different strategies that the rules force teams to use.

Live play-by-play says eight.....