Blue In BC
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Blue In BC
-
-
-
2 minutes ago, Jesse said:
I haven't re-watched the play, but I had read that Alexander had been moved to HB while Hallett was at safety on that play.
Hallett was in at safety a lot. What I couldn't tell is whether they were using a 6 DB defensive set? I can't imagine Holm or Nichols coming out unless needing a rest or injury issue.
-
39 minutes ago, Slimy Sculpin said:
From the CFL website:
"Each team may have a maximum of 45 players (min. 44), including three quarterbacks, at least one global player, 21 national players including one nationalized American. Teams can dress a maximum of 19 Americans not including quarterbacks and the nationalized American."
The way I interpret this is that, as an example, Bighill, an American, could have been designated as the nationalized American and be included in the group of 21 nationals (one national would have to be dropped). Since the 19 Americans no longer includes Bighill's spot another can then be rostered. A caveat is that this nationalized American can only play 23 plays.
That doesn't sound like a correct interpretation either. Excluding QB's there are 16 imports starting or on the roster even if a team decides to start more Canadians. Then there are 4 DI's. That's 20 imports + the QB's. not 19 + QB's. The statement indicates ( to me ) that the nationalized import would be the # 20, just with a different category name. There was an allowance for one nationalized on each side of the ball. In the end 20 is 20 whether 2 are nationalized of just classified as imports.
Kind of smoke and mirrors. The only advantage is that the nationalized could replace a Canadian for a number of plays. IE: Bighill could have come in on a 34 defence with Thomas / Lawson going out for that play or plays.
The larger statement is that we didn't once use that approach in 2023. So I see that as more info that another import can't be added. It's a fixed number and it should be. A few times or a few game in 2023 a 3rd Global could replace an import ratio wise as a trade off. Globals are effectively another form of DI. Rarely does any team have a 3rd global better than a starting or DI import.
-
4 minutes ago, 17to85 said:
Ford had the measurable....
And he didn't even land a spot on any PR. Holm was a starter much like Alford and that could draw more NFL interest.
-
17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:
I don't see it. At the risk of sounding too much like booch... Holm is too skinny for the NFL to look at i think.
Maybe but that doesn't stop him from taking a shot. Did anybody think Ford would have quick success in his NFL bid?
-
On 2023-11-20 at 4:29 PM, Tracker said:
We needed a dominant nose tackle ALA Oakman all year and that was very, very evident in the Grey Cup game. Further, if Walters cannot score a NI fullback who can block, run and catch the odd pass, it will be a big black mark against him.
Well sure, there are always some potential free agents that might be better than someone on our current roster. That said we were a veteran team coming off a 3rd Grey Cup appearance losing a close contest. The point was that SMS limits teams from just signing every other free agent that is an upgrade. We signed Lawler and Castillo. Brought back Eli.
Did we have more money to spend? IDK. I would have loved to have been able to get Sayles back but take that he left for more money. Couture left for more money but also because he is from BC.
How much more would that have cost if those two returned and who would we have lost elsewhere on the roster?
The roster is another year older. There will be some combination of decisions made.
We do want to retain. What free agents from other teams are we interested in and are they interested in our offer? Who are they replacing and is it costing us more or less than the one departing.
Step 1 is seeing who of our current roster we want back and can get back as free agency approaches
-
13 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:
Where do you prioritize him around Jefferson, Jeffcoat, Schoen, Oliviera, the entire OL, Wolitarsky, Lawson, Walker?
There's a strong possibility he's asked to take a pay cut again and says no.
I don't know that it will happen but I'd like to see Collaros take a $100K cut. It's not a matter of what he is worth. It's a matter of his salary and how it reduces what can be spent elsewhere. The same could be said about Lawler. It's a balancing act with no perfect solution.
I said the same thing about Kelly in Toronto. Let's see how they adjust their roster after giving him another $500K over his current deal. I'm not exactly sure of what his initial contract was but he's scheduled for a significant increase if he doesn't take his NFL option window. Any increase somewhere comes at the need to decrease elsewhere.
-
25 minutes ago, Slimy Sculpin said:
From what I've read, it appears to me that O'Shea's plan was to dress and play Bighill only sparingly because of his injury. Am I right or wrong in that interprtation? Let's say I'm right, could O'Shea have then rostered Bighill as a "nationalized" American (still could have got plenty of snaps), dropped one of the marginal Canadians and dressed another American, say a DB like Rose?
I think you're incorrect but it could be that I'm incorrect in my interpretation of that rule.
My understanding is that a Nationalized import can replace a Canadian for a number of plays. OTOH, it doesn't mean you can add an additional import to the roster as you suggest. Number of imports is a fixed number.
-
17 minutes ago, wbbfan said:
We had the tools to fix every position in hand imo. That’s the real concern. Before lawler when was the last impact fa pick up? I really want oakman but I’m not expecting fa to change our team. That’ll either happen before fa or wont at all.
We weren't in a position of need to pick up talent in free agency. 4 years later that's changed potentially as players have aged and SMS has gone up in order to retain them. In 2023 we added Lawler, Eli and Castillo which were very good additions. It's a plus minus question. However, Maston, Taylor, Jefferson, Harris, Lawson and a few others were picked up in free agency.
Who do we lose voluntarily or otherwise that we need to replace in free agency or feel the immediate need to replace? There will be an enormous amount of talent available across the CFL in February. We'll make some choices.
-
Wow. I haven't read all the posts but the few I read sounded like lemmings running in unison off the cliff. That's not the same as saying everything mentioned was wrong but can we at least wait and see how free agency plays out?
2 hours ago, Colin Unger said:That last play before the 3 minute warning it was a first down play. Everyone in the building knew we were going to run the ball. I thought that would have been a great time to catch Montreal off guard with a passing play and seal the victory. There was very little downside because the three minute warning was going to stop the clock regardless.
Except that if it's incomplete we'd be faced with 2nd and long. However that's what we faced be running on 1st down when everyone in the country knew we'd do that. As big an issue is not having a quicker route tree and release to avoid an obvious rush on our QB. One maybe 2 1st downs and the game would have been won. Just one 1st down and we'd have used up another minute on the clock even if we only moved the ball 11 yards.
- Jesse and Colin Unger
-
2
-
17 hours ago, Brandon said:
1 - Zach
2 - Hall calling a terrible game also starting injured Bighill and starting Houston.
3 - Punting and kick coverage was atrocious. For the love of god find someone who can kick the ball it can't be that hard to find someone?
I laughed earlier in the season when O'Shea said they were adjusting their kicking and coverage schemes and were close to figuring it out. That was BS by him then as it is now.
- BigBlueFanatic, JohnnyAbonny, Tracker and 2 others
-
1
-
4
-
4 minutes ago, 17to85 said:
I didn't notice any difference in the offense with Brown running it vs. Collaros, and in some cases he ran it better (vs. Edmonton for example)
at 35 going on 36 Collaros is not a sure bet to maintain his play which is already slipping.
Very small sample size for Brown. Collaros would have probably found a way to beat the Elks as well. Tough start but he usually makes a come back. Time will tell about Brown. I'm on the fence but would like to keep him around.
-
7 minutes ago, GCn20 said:
My belief is that Zac's been looking for the home run ball too often this year.
That's been part of our offence since he arrived. With the receivers we have it makes sense. Receivers like Schoen, Lawler and Demski live off of that. I have no problem with that. However I have some issues about the play selection inside the red zone. The int was a good example of a very long pass from the 10 yard line that was slow developing.?
It was also a very good play by the Als DB. So need to give some credit for their coverage.
-
2 hours ago, Noeller said:
it's wild to me that there are people in the league who think Kola is a great C, and that leads me to believe we could actually get assets for something that most of us believe is the most replaceable player on the OL, with Eli ready to be so much better next year.
He's a potential free agent IIRC.
-
3 minutes ago, Booch said:
And if that happens....do people still say he makes the correct decisions re roster??
Sure...u do a guy a solid to get his name inscribed...but u also bone 44 other guys from possibly getting their name on a cup if that majorly blows up in your face ..that would be the stupidest of stupid moves he's made...and should be grated over the coals in media fiercely for it...hope it doesn't happen
I hope he doesn't do something that stupid. It could cost us the game. Roster size is not that big that you can just keep players on it for a championship game that can't contribute.
- Booch and rebusrankin
-
2
-
19 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:
Answer: because it works and we are winning. Because he does what the club asks, works hard at a thankless task of blocking on offence and special teams, fills a big role on the short yardage offence which has been extremely effective this season. O’Shea has been open about his reasons but some don’t listen here because they have been convinced by others that O’Shea doesn’t have a clue how manage a roster, all actual evidence to the contrary, and would rather see an 8th d-lineman bolster our already number 1 defence instead of having a starting fullback on heavy package plays. People may not like the answer and tune it out in favour of their personal narrative, but it’s not like O’Shea hasn’t hid his reasons from us.
That would be the same reason they kept Hurl at MLB in the past.
- rebusrankin and Jesse
-
2
-
1 hour ago, DTonOB said:
From what I saw Tuesday/Wednesday they had taken Jackson off his spot on punt team. Made me think they were preparing in case they had to carry an extra American receiver (if there was doubt that Demski/Bailey would be able to finish the game).
I haven't seen Jackson make any impact on ST's. I'd have taken off that role long ago.
- rebusrankin, wbbfan and JCon
-
2
-
1
-
I wouldn't read too much into which players are seeing less or more reps today. IMO the real prep for the WDF starts next week. Today is just giving vets more time to heal from the long season. It also helps prepare the back ups if and when needed during the game.
- Stickem, Bigblue204, JohnnyAbonny and 3 others
-
6
-
I see BC Lion Teuhema won't appeal his 1 game suspension so he won't play this weekend against the Stamps. From a process point of view that's what I would have wanted to happen. From a biased point of view, I'd rather he wasn't available to play against the Bombers in the WDF. However the Lions might not make it past the Stamps.
-
It's all speculation but they've kept Richmond around for a few years and at the moment he's the heir apparent at LT. That said there is nothing really suggesting Bryant retires. OTOH the Bombers might start to negotiate his contract downwards and he may balk at that idea. Richmond is also a pending free agent and he may choose to leave in free agency for a chance to start and / or earn more money.
For that matter IIRC Gray, Dobson and Kolo are also potential free agents so who knows what 2024 brings.
-
9 minutes ago, Booch said:
more or less...too bad takes a nothing game to finally get some guys a shot, but is what it is this yr
Would have liked to see Lawrence on as well, and who is the 4th DA?...not shown unless my eyes playing tricks on me. Hopefully we get majority of Oline with Dobson and Eli running the show....the listed starters may just be that and not see much actual playtime....but I do like the over all look of who we have on and excited to see what a few of these guys can do
Got to be either McGhee or Alston. Doesn't really matter because both should get on the field at some point. I don't think Lawler or Bailey play the entire game. Parker / Houston will rotate with McGhee I suspect?
-
1 hour ago, JCon said:
I'd take this to suggest a good chance Demski, Hardrick and Alexander don't play. Demski might dress as an emergency player if we have injuries. There aren't many Canadians to add if we put him on the 1 game IR. Although that could be another way to add Gauthier for this game.
Likely will see Richmond suit up for Hardrick.
I have no doubt they'd all be playing if this was the WDF this week. Just a little more time to heal and gear up for that game.
-
41 minutes ago, Booch said:
No way you take Kelly of Teams...dude s a stud...Gauthier should take Jackson's spot, and then that DA gets used in a better way....and End...Fox or an extra DB....
I'm not disagreeing with that. I just think O'Shea won't take Jackson off the AR. That means we need to remove a Canadian so choices are limited although Briggs is pretty much dead weight. I could live with him being taken off instead.
Briggs will be 34 by next TC and I'm expecting he'll be in tough making the roster. Age, SMS and needing AR room for players like Kelly and / or 2024 draft choices.
That said, Briggs has 11 ST's and I can't find stats for Kelly ( useless CFL.CA info ). In any case giving Kelly more reps can't be a bad thing whether Gauthier is added this week or not.
-
Ok let's see who we shuffle onto the AR for this week to give some vets some rest. In many cases I think we'll see lots of the non starting Canadians on the AR get more reps: Dobson, Eli, Boo, Augustine and Hallett for example. Whether they start of just take more reps than the usual starters is a TBD.
I'd like to see Houston get on the AR this week. Alexander is nicked so we might be a little thin. Besides he'll be next man up if we experience any new injuries this week. In fact he may regain his starting role this week. IDK. How they'd get him on the AR is a ratio / DI question. I suppose if Alexander is nicked they could just 1 game him this week and just add in Houston to the AR. Hallett to start at safety but Houston could rotate into the secondary.
Now the bigger questions. Do we decide to get any of Haba, Garbutt, Fox or Richmond onto the roster. Letting Jeffcoat have more time to get healthier is not a bad idea. Richmond could spell one of our T's but both seem healthy at the moment.
This is a perfect chance to get Gauthier back onto the AR replacing Kelly on ST's. Gauthier seems to be healthy again and some live game reps will help in the play offs.
That's my take.
2023/2024 CFL (Non Bombers) Off Season News
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
Yes and no. It's tied in to what positional players we want to use spots for DI's. Augustine has a role on ST's as well. All part of the balancing act. We should be looking at a different option than McCrae IMO. While he's not a bad player, he doesn't really excel at RB, receiver or returner.
If we lose any of Oliveria, Augustine or Grant we might see different skill sets in among the choices for our DI's. Obviously IMO we should be looking at the whole import FB as a current choice. That would open up options for our back ups.