Shwa

I thought you were like Rue McClanahan, from Golden Girls fame. It must be the handle "Rue."

The CFL is a pro league so "Pro-Style" doesn't work for me much. A metaphor is a substitute designed to signify a like-concept, not replace it entirely. It would equally true to me to say that I like the good college ball because it is like the CFL style. Then again I like the northern style better than the southern style. If you know what I mean.

It's an opinion thread (i.e. "sucks") we get that. But it's a fun one. Heck, I prefer watching good college games over some NFL games. Rams versus Seahawks? Bleh. To me the CFL is more like the college style of play, a little more wide open and little quicker in play.

Nor did you contribute your share to health care, roads, the military... a tax cheat is a tax cheat and you are one. You can justify all you want about public servants DB pension plans, but you aren't paying your fair share and committing fraud against the country.

It was the damned Quakers and their peace and love schtick.

And this is interesting on a couple of points: Adams wasn't too far removed from the ethics of the path of co-existence that the British chose to take in Canada in the 18th and early 19th centuries; there was a break with this fundamental philosophy and it was a rather swift break. Secondly, the extermination policy wasn't all too successful since there are plenty of Native Americans alive nowadays. Which begs the question as to how successful it really was compared to the cost. Not very IMO. We can guess that as the colonies expanded west they were preceeded by epidemics or waves of sickness that ravaged the Native American populations and weakened their ability to resist the expansion when it arrived in their territory. "Indian Wars" were generally short lived affairs and might have consisted of a series of raids and the odd massacre on both sides and even then the casualties are poorly documented in a lot of cases.

But possibly the violence occurred because the accidental deaths happened first.

Really? So the mines and submarines in the harbours would stop all that air cargo and all those produce trucks from the US from coming up here? Or would they threaten the cod fishing industry? Just trying to sort out what you are getting at.

An unproven sample hardly - and I can't over-emphasize this enough because of the veterans in the leagues - reflects reality. Raw player skills - aggregate or not - simply does not reflect on the league overall and does not account for the disparity between "raw" test results and actual game conditions. Otherwise, using that kind of logic, you can base the performance of an air force on the physical fitness tests of unproven recruits. Come on now... Does not equate to "better." Then I challenge you - despite what the owners, players, coaches and advertisers have decided - to find that criteria. I am betting you can't. In fact, I know you can't. So does the pay. But you still haven't established any actual criteria, just your humble opinion. The fact here is that I like both equally well. Which is all that can be said isn't it?

But the only "proof" Shady has offered is combine results which only account for a certain, small group of players. An unproven sample certainly is not technically correct on any level. And means nothing when talking about actual averages. So as a proof it goes out the window. Now if there are some faster players in the NFL than the CFL, I could agree. If there are some bigger players in the NFL, I could agree and even agree that there are some stronger players. Sure. But "some" does not equate to "better" especially when there is a significant difference in the rules at play. And I like both equally well.

Rue has lost her mind.

So Shady, do they invite 5 year NFL veterans to the combine? How about a 15 year veteran? How about rookie after his first season? You know, actual NFL players? Really, this shouldn't be hard for you to grasp, yet it seems to be a real problem for you. Let me guess, you judge the performance of a standing air force by how well they do in air cadets right?

Yes and let's follow the logic of Shady's Fun Facts: Why on earth would the NFL want "access" to CFL players? Since, as Shady's Fun Fact unequivocally states, is that all the best players are already in the NFL; bigger, faster, stronger - according to the NFL Combine. I mean, what does a first stringer on a CFL roster have over a bigger, faster, stronger fourth stringer on a NFL roster? What were the combine results of that undrafted walk-on?

So let's review, shall we? Shady's Fun Facts So you are taking a test of a select group of non-NFL players to determine the overall 'betterness' of an entire league. Tsk, tsk, tsk. More truthiness at work. Let me ask you the same questions you so ungracefully dodged a few pages ago: Does a 5 year veteran of the NFL get invited to the NFL combine Shady? How about a 15 year veteran? Or how about a guy that has just finished his rookie year, does he get an invite? Because we are talking about NFL players. Not combine invites who have never played a single NFL game. So you do realize that the marginal differences in combine results are marginal right? You do realize that some NFL players didn't get invited to the combines right? That the combine is a scouting process? Do you even get that? Do you even get that there is more to a successful football player than a few select measurements in a combined scouting physical fitness test? Cause it doesn't seem you do. Like you are... clueless. And you STILL haven't given any proof whatsoever that "NFL players are faster than CFL players anyways" and I don't think you can. Which leaves you shit out of luck with your truthiness claim. Over for me? Nah, son. The laughs are still aplenty while you flounder around in your own crapulence. ROFL!!!

A body stone is not something to joke about eyeball.

God forbid if one is a hybrid. An almost schizophrenic existence in Toronto or Ithaca. And the only reason I say that is because this thread has spent it's purpose. RIP Doug Flutie.

TL;DR

No, but I bet "this forum of public servants" can certainly understand fraud and ripping off hard working Canadians while you cheat on your taxes... Ohhh... wait. Now I know what you mean by "free market." Just remember now, I know you are a tax cheat. I'll keep this in mind when I read your posts from here on in.

Read more: http://www.cancer.ca/canada-wide/how%20you%20can%20help/take%20action/advocacy%20what%20were%20doing/marijuana%20smoking/cancer%20risks%20of%20long-term%20recreational%20use/get%20the%20facts%20frequently%20asked%20questions%20about%20marijuana%20and%20cancer%20risks%20of%20long-term%20recreational%20smoking%20of%20marijuana.aspx?sc_lang=en#ixzz1RGLWBov1 I know, I know. There is no way that pot can cause cancer to the same degree as cigarettes. But that is not to say there is 0 risk of cancer with marijuana use. The lack of definitive study also does not mean a 0 risk of cancer.

Typical Shady, resort to ad hominem when the argument is a big, giant fail. Which it is in this case. You STILL haven't proved a thing, except refer to a limited group of prospects, some of which make the NFL, some maybe even the CFL. D'OH! So when you are you going to provide your proof Shady? Or is this another one of your 'Shady's Fun Facts' moments, you know, you're ability at 'truthiness?' LOFL!!!

SO where are the "NFL players" Shady? You cite combine results for athletes invited to the combine, but no where do you show that "NFL players" are anything. Not even averages for "average NFL players." Because the scouting combine is to show who might be a prospect. Nevermind all the actual NFL players who are never invited to the scouting combine or who make a team yet never drafted. So you lose again Shady, and any time you would like to try, please give it another shot. Except do better next time will ya?. In the meantime, you STILL don't know what you are talking about and when you think you do, you have little way of proof. Typical. It's disgusting.

The government doesn't want to be painted in a bad light. Or painted with the same brush. Or carved up.

Moonlight. In 1915, they purchased Northern River.

Mammoliti is against free speech, such as they are in Canada. That should "offend taxpayers" more.

"LOL" Got proof of that Shady? The "best athletes?" Oh wait, we are still waiting to hear about how the NFL combine prove that "NFL players" are something-something. Is there an update on that yet Shady? No? Didn't think so. You still don't know what you are talking about do you? So I am still waiting for you to prove your "facts."