Mike

no That's not necessarily true. Who else made Stevie Baggs a sack leader? how many sacks did the other guys get?compared to what we're used to seeing, our defense is going to look pretty craptacular in this area Ask Jon Chick ...

no That's not necessarily true. Who else made Stevie Baggs a sack leader?

Yeah just not enough depth to do that. But our fifth receiver spot is iffy as it is. If I'm picking our receivers right now, I'm going Moore, Denmark, Kohlert, Watson and ... I don't even know after that. Urrutia maybe? He had a few balls knocked out of his hands last night but I also don't really think they had him doing things that put him in a position to succeed. Jaymar Johnson? Great, but he's a slot not a wideout. Bert Reed wasn't bad either. I certainly wouldn't want Kemp or Barnes.

You're also cherry picking a bit, but I'm sure you knew that. It's easy to say that Etcheverry's defense was weak in 2010 (especially their defensive line) after he lost a ton of personnel from the previous season. And hey, they still went to the Grey Cup. None of that makes him a great or even a good defensive coordinator, but cherry picking statistics that have everything to do with personnel that won't be wearing blue and gold makes little sense. Maybe for speculation. But to use it and try to prove anything definitively? Not likely.

How? They've both been given more or less the same opportunity.

I wish, you'll have your usual bomber supporters who will blindly give excuses and support whoever is on staff bash you and say its way to early, but reality is Etchevary's not a good DC. It was simply a bad hire.With who we have where, I don't see our run game getting any better. I used to think our pass defence would be good, but I'm starting to doubt that to. With Anderson sitting, we only have one, maybe two effective pass rushers on the DLine. It's not blind support. And if it is, then your discontent is blind as well. Maybe he's not a good DC, it's not unlikely by any stretch. But when you're unconventional, preseason isn't going to be where the determination is made

We won the time of possession battle (35 and change to 24 and change), we only took 3 penalties, we had nearly 300 passing yards, we won the yardage battle overall, we broke 100 yards rushing and we lost on a last second field goal. On top of that, can someone point out a blatant mistake made by anyone who is actually going to see major playing time? I saw big mistakes by Kemp, Howard, Barnes and Peterson. I saw lots to be positive about and lots worth being optimistic about. I saw bad things too and there are still questions but it's comical that people are reacting as if this was 52-0 all over again.

We sucked in the preseason last year. People were worried and it turned out they had every right to be worried. We lost by a total of 7 points combined and our starting QB appears to be pretty good. I'd say we're miles ahead of last year at this time.

As sure as the sun will rise, we will all read way too much into preseason.

We can say Calgary had their starting lineup manhandle ours, but let's be upfront about one thing. We had non starters flat out kill drives with drops while Willy was in. Kemp with two (and a third later) and Barnes with one. Willy looked sharp.

Way too early. They've openly said they're not employing much of their scheme, are you just disregarding that?

Sucks about Newman. For so many reasons.

I like Riderfans. A lot of knowledge gets passed around there. But it's not the most objective board I've ever visited. Everything that is bad is bad. Unless a Rider does it. Then it's not bad. Which happens a lot of places. But I think it's amped up a bit on RF. Might just be the volume of their userbase though. see: Taj Smith being charged with aggravated assault see: Kory Sheets on Twitter see: Ricky Foley CFLPA comments When you get past that, it's an interesting read.

I PM'd them a while back for you and they said your account is active. Originally Posted by WBB-Mike Just passing along a message from a member of my site. He mentioned this morning that nobody here has activated his account under the name "Duressler47" and I told him I'd pass it along. Cheers, Mike Reply: Mike, Says: Duressler47 Registered User Mini Statistics Join Date 01-19-2014 Current Activity Viewing Thread Hey!!!!! Last Activity Today 12:43 PM

He actually was a tight end in college then converted to guard on the line. I'm pretty sure he converted to tackle, not guard. Tackle is where I'd like to see him too. Knapp did not show well at RT last year... On one day of practice. Either way, I like him at guard. Two imports on the OL is two imports, I don't care if they play tackle, center, guard or right wing.

Yep. It definitely helps. They don't appear to have taken away any eligibility options (anyone who once was still would be) but they've made it easier to determine in some cases and added different possibilities on how one could be eligible.

Here's another example ... a guy like David Scott from UBC. 5th year upcoming as a receiver for the school, born in Texas. He's probably eligible now, provided that he can successfully pass the citizenship test. That's one fairly decent prospect added already, without even looking much into it. Same with a guy like Travoy Martinez from Saskatchewan.

As an example ... Simon Fraser currently has 24 Americans on their spring roster. That's potentially 24 more "nationals" being added to the talent pool. From one school. Probably the school with the largest sample, but other big schools will have a handful here and there as well.

Not all that knowledgeable about the process but generally doesn't it take quite awhile to get Canadian citizenship, like at least a few years? A lot of these players who come up here from the U.S. might be out of the league by the time they get their Canadian citizenship. It's not about getting Americans who come up here to play pro ball granted "national" status. It's about getting the status granted for Americans who come up here to play CIS ball (or NCAA via Simon Fraser) I'm not sure how feasible it will be though. The rule is 1095 days in a 4 year span. So complete your degree, graduate as a senior, hit the CFL. Good for future guys who fit the mold of guys like Doc Cassama, Akiem Hicks, etc.

oh wow. From now on, all you have to do to be a "national" (non-import) is be a Canadian citizen at the time of your first contract signing. That changes A LOT.

Officially ratified. Will update with details as they roll in No more 9-game injured list. 6-game injured list now. 44 man active roster, 2 man reserve (instead of 42/4) Practice roster expanded from 7 to 10 (12 to 15 in fall) NO MORE NON IMPORTS AND IMPORTS They are now known as "nationals and internationals"

Yup. and make sure you dont sit in the end zone. You will be quickly escorted over to the assigned seating area. Let us know how Hall and Willy look today. Just to be clear, there isn't a practice today. They're travelling.

So it looks like ... 3 non-imports on the offensive line 2 non-import receivers 2 rotating on defense between Bucknor, Thomas, Newman and maybe a few other spare parts. That's not so bad.

A+ post