Mark H.

Well, part of the problem with previous OLs was the lack of receivers who could stretch the field. Teams could keep more defenders in the box when they played the Bombers.

It was a domino effect - the safety was often lined up as an extra linebacker.

I know right? But all signs are pointing in that direction...

If all that is true, then I don’t see how they can keep Bond. Worst case scenario: Couture’s not quite ready & Foketi starts at guard.

So the starting Canadians would be: Westerman & Co, Loffler, Harris, Goossen, Chungh, Feoli - Gudino and ?? If the LB corps is all American and they keep Bond on the OL, they need another Canadian receiver or need to have two Canadian DL on the field all the time

Agreed on Heath. I know there is negative talk about him, but what I saw was mostly QBs not throwing to 8 & 23’s side of the field.

Being charged when not behind the wheel - can someone provide a link to the wording of that?

Somehow, everything has to be about which camp you’re in.

There are certain posters here who know the game quite well. When you have THOSE POSTERS telling you that the scheme was adjusted to cover up for a weakness in the middle, you should, at the very least, be aware that they know what they're talking about. Because - when you make a post like this one - it appears you have not read and comprehended the entire thread. That's pretty much what you have to do on a forum - read it as a whole and know who the really knowledgeable posters are.

Yes I can. CFL teams can cut ties with a player at any time - all they have to do is cut him. If not, then the Als can also be fined for cutting Darian Durant. Who gets to decide the difference between the two scenarios?

It won’t make a shred of difference

All they really did was cut a player. There is a really simple way around this - just don’t state why the player was cut.

I’m comforted by the realization that there is a method to the Bombers’ madness.

LeFrance can back up Harris, play STs, and perhaps fill Flanders' spot if they ever run into ratio trouble at other positions.

Sarcasm alert: fans of the Winnipeg Blue Bombers need to imagine an early retirement conversation between Kyle Walters & Andrew Harris.

#twitterfriends

Why not Flanders?

And if one of Dressler, Adams or receiver X goes down - they still have two impact receivers.

Moot point - no can ask to be paid more on their 2017 contract The following year an under-performing player will be cut or paid less - you know it

Sure, but it's a case of pot meet kettle.

Totally agree. But somehow the players get portrayed as the 'bad guy' in these situations. We get the media saying things like 'imagine if this was Andrew Harris & Kyle Walters.' I'm not saying he's making the right decision - time will tell. But he doesn't deserve to be called an ass for wanting to do better for himself and his family.

Could they be the rookie of the year?

Each obligation assumed by one party must find a corresponding promise by the other party. I just think that if they have the right to cut a player while he's under contract, he should also have the right to ask for his release. Which is the way some other teams have been doing it.

Given the way he played last year, one can see why teams would be interested and why he believes he has a shot.

A contract can favour one party over the other, but one party cannot 'hold all the cards' so to speak. https://npc.gvsd.ca/web/rschroeder/2013 - Canadian Law PowerPoints/PPT 15 - Elements of a Contract.pdf Page 9: Consideration