Collectively, they are awful, as much as it might bother some of you to hear. Don’t worry, I know the drill: when someone disagrees with you, call them negative. It’s a great way to shut down discussion and spare you the discomfort of confronting differing viewpoints.
Three-minute recap of the Montreal-Calgary game, what do they say?
Vernon Adams is great, finds a way to get it done.
That Calgary receiver who had 4 TDs is great.
Y’all seriously think that’s worthy of praise? You need a panel to tell you those things? What is the point of a football panel? Is it just to feature four middle-aged guys in suits making lame jokes? Or should there be, I don’t know, actual analysis? Something you couldn’t hear if you went to a bar and polled any CFL fan, even after a few drinks?
Climie drew on his experience to talk about receivers and coverage.
Schultz drew on his experience to talk about blocking and protection, although his content went south the longer he stayed on.
Dunigan used to be better. Now he’s just all filler.
The best person they ever had on the panel was Paul LaPolice. His segments were informative and concise. He broke down football concepts and showed you how they were executed or defended on certain plays. You left his segments knowing more about the game than you did before. That’s kind of the point of journalism.