GCn20

Doesn't have the same impact or depth as Mike Hawk gets.

Something I'm calling him. Scanning every post from 100 feet above waiting to swoop in and pounce. Someone who didn't take themselves so seriously might not have felt the need to swoop in at all HawkMan. Pot kettle. Maybe you just don't see how condescending you come off when you do crap like that? That is rich that you come in and make condescending post after condescending post, and never really post other than to do so, and then suggest the reaction to it is condescending. LMAO. Good lord Mike Hawk do you have no self awareness about how you come off on here with posts like that or why others might be fed up with it and start calling you Hawk Man or Mike Hawk? We've gone around this mulberry bush Mike, why not talk football once in a while instead of showing up to do drive bys on posters you don't like? Anyone who looks at your post history can see actual football conversation from you without potshots attached or as the sole purpose of your post is rare. Condescending thy name is Mike Hawk. Unless you are seriously suggesting the intent of your post was solely to point out my mistake without being a **** about it, but anyone reading the way you did it can see that wasn't the case.

Hoping he accomplishes it this week.

We did not add and subtract them at the same time. Also, QB in QB out represents the cap space saved. Period. You can't twist logic and suggest that our lowest SMS roster player released in the entire offseason represents the cost of replacing your backup QB. There is a direct cost of replacement that is pretty easy to track, especially for QBs who aren't multi positional players.

Does that diminish the point Hawk Man. But yeah brain cramp after following NFL preseason. Whatever would we do without Hawk Man pointing out every brain cramp. Hard to be a forum superhero. Thanks for your service. Roster size was completely irrelevant to the point of the conversation but a mistake is a mistake and where there are mistakes Mike "Hawk Man" will be there to make sure he points them out without actually adding to the conversation.

Not expecting much out of Hansen. He is a stop gap imo. Probably more valuable as a leader in the room than on the field now.

How do you figure you are carrying one less roster player elsewhere? 3 Qbs are needed. Your math is dead wrong. Whenever you trim someone off the 53 regardless of position, you have to add one to the 53 to take his place. At QB, you replace with QB. At other positions whoever you are adding to the 53 to take the place of someone on the 53 you have to factor in the cost of doing so onto the SMS before you can realize what your SMS savings might be. COR. Sorry to be harsh but this is pretty basic stuff. Every slot on the 53 has to be filled and costs money. If you cut Brady Oliveira tomorrow and don't replace him with another running back on the 53, you still have to pay someone to go onto the 53 at least the league minimum. Therefore the savings are BO's game cheque minus whoever you add to the 53 game cheque. Never ever more. You simply cannot cut a player in order to save their entire remaining earnings to the SMS. COST OF REPLACEMENT must ALWAYS be factored in. ALWAYS. No avoiding it. Your final calculation is correct that two players went off the 53 and two players went on. Therefore Durant minus 3rd string QB is the calculation for how much his cap savings represented. Bighill minus 3rd string LB is how much extra SMS we took on afterwards.

That's how neutered the CFL is when handing out suspensions. Hagerty might get the Moreno treatment yet.

It wasn't a 90-95k contract. It was 170k of which 70k was the signing bonus. Once paid we take on that cap hit no matter what. That means we have created 100k in cap space minus the cost of Durant's replacement which I generously qualified as close to league minimum 75k thus the true cap savings of Durant's release are 25k. Whenever a player is released you cannot calculate SMS savings as simply the remainder of their contract because that is categorically untrue because someone has to come in and fill that roster spot and that eats up some of the savings. It's business 101 stuff really. The only way that the full remainder of his contract becomes truly open on the SMS is if we chose to go with only 2 QBs and not roster a 3rd which NEVER happens in this league. The only time this isn't applicable is when you are swapping guys out on the PR but that is because there is no SMS savings to be calculated.

I totally get what you are saying, but if a team really wanted Bighill all they had to do was trim someone else off their roster to make it work, or if possible use 6 game IR savings that every team usually gets throughout the year. I know that's not ideal, but when a guy like Bighill ,who was the best defensive player not only available but overall in the league, becomes available if someone really wanted him it wouldn't be hard to make happen. It would just involve choices. Winnipeg was at an advantage with having some freed up space, but not as much as people think. Almost half of Durant's salary already paid, the remainder of his salary was just over league minimum and that is how much we have to pay to roster a 3rd QB. Like I say, the savings were minimal. I doubt we were far off our cap projections when we signed Biggie. The total cap room created by Durant retiring was probably around 20-25k because he stole his signing bonus like the rat thief he is. We just wanted him the most more than anything....and rightfully so considering our MLB situation the year before.

Cap doesn't matter until the end of the season. Everyone is under the cap until the end of the year. You make room as needed.

The savings on Durant were minimal as we had paid his signing bonus at the time of his retirement. However it would have accounted for some of Bighill's salary. Semantics. Whether KW didn't offer him anything, or did and failed to get his guy, it both ends up with the same F grade for our GM. This whole you can't make a guy sign here might work for hockey, but in the CFL there is no excuse for losing out on a player if you want him bad enough. GM's are literally hired and fired based on their ability to get guys under contract. That may not be fair, but it most certainly is there job description. If they are good at it they will succeed and flourish, if they are not they will inevitably be replaced. Walters was very good at getting FA's here at one time. He does not seem to be that great at it anymore.

If Eli could didnt commit numerous busts in pass pro I might agree but like ballace tonight, he fails to even block someone numerous times a game. He is awful. Talk about trolling. Easily the worst take I've read this year.

Kramdi was outstanding today. We are screwed if Zac is out long term Eli sucks. Putting him into the starting lineup makes a bad OL even worse Brown has stunk in his last 2 starts. Hoping he is MUCH better if we have to play him. Did more than Brown

I saw the results. They speak for themselves. We dont pay KW to try hard and fail, we pay him to get the job done. Sorry if that doesnt seem fair, but what in life is.

Baldonado would have gone to the highest bidder, just as he did a few months ago. Walters just didn't bother trying to sign him, or didn't bother to make an offer that would get the job done.

Just absolute garbage GMing. Baldonado would have helped in so many ways. I get he wasn't having the most impressive season but a lot of that was on Ottawa itself. I don't understand why KW refuses to take some risks to improve our roster.

The 2 point convert is only the better choice if we make it. I can certainly understand a coach not wanting to put the whole game on the line on the road when the crowd has already disrupted the flow of our offence. It really is a damned if you do, damned if you don't decision and I think there is very strong rationale to go either way especially on the road. I'm not going to second guess it because it wasn't the decision that cost us the game. It was lack of outplaying our opposition when we needed to do so.

Collaros is the old grey mare and this should be his last season, but atm he is still our best option unfortunately.

You don't even make sense about comparing him to Cobb based on last game. He was inserted for Demski and played inside. When he subs in for Cobb, if ever, a direct comparison can be made. I suspect that Singer would be much more impactful even at field WR. Games that Eli has played centre most DEFINITELY showed he was crap. Not sure what the f you were watching? I never once stated that Singer wasn't a better option than Cobb. What I stated was that Geno would have represented a much more impactful signing than Singer would be this year. Be clear what someone has said before you shoot your yap and put words in their mouths. I, for one, have been advocating all year for 3 IMP receivers and have made it clear I think it is a coaching mistake to not do so. Cobb is on for his passport. I would bet a million dollars if Singer had the same passport Cobb would have never seen the field. I don't like the ratio use, but it's not a straight ahead comparison because of it. I still agree, and always have, that Singer should be on instead of Cobb and that if we need to make ratio we do it elsewhere. I also still feel that Geno Lewis would have been a huge signing had we gone there. I, also, have never disputed that Singer wouldn't be an upgrade over Cobb but it's passport not skill that is determining that spot on the field. Still a mistake but for some reason KW and MOS want that spot to be NAT. Not sure why. I don't like the NAT rule in general but I can understand that NATs, even if they are less skilled, are going to get spots on the roster because there is a minimum number needed and that goes for starting as well. Why we don't use the minimum number of NATs and use the nationalized IMP rule that is open for criticism for sure.

He is good enough to back up and play SY that's why. Not good enough to start. That doesn't take a wizard to figure out. Your hard on for him aside, he has had multiple chances to start and take the job and has epically failed every time. I think you are about the only one left here that actually thinks he would represent an upgrade to our line. No one here, besides you, would love it more if Eli could take the job and run with it. He can't. Every time he is given the opportunity it has been a fiasco. I would suspect that if there were another player of his ilk (journeyman OL that can sub in multiple positions and play SY) that we would sign him and cut Tui free. This offseason we likely do, and I highly suspect there will be exactly zero interest from other teams in him. But keep banging that drum. He is a victim of coaching....lmao.

All your player musings are your opinion as well. Singer played a decent game subbing for Demski, not Cobb. He was inside getting Demski's touches and had 62 yards, a promising start, but not spectacular. At no point did I argue that 3 IMP receivers would not be preferable, I argued that we should be looking for an impact IMP receiver. i stand by that. Brown is not as good as Collaros this year, that's proven not opinion. I also said Smith wasn't getting reps last year because he wasn't ready at the time and was earning an uptick in his reps this year and getting them. I stand by that as well. You are trying to put words into my mouth by twisting what I've said into something I didn't with the exception of Brown, which my comments are based in fact. Brown struggled badly his last 2 games this year and definitely does not have the command of this offence like Collaros does. He might get there, but he's not there yet. I have never once said Kramdi is the best, and I DARE you to find a comment suggesting I did. I stated that Kramdi is not nearly as bad as you have made him out to be and is a good player not a crappy one. Do you dispute that? Like honestly? As for Elsbury, he is in there because Tui is crap. I don't dispute that we need a new centre though. Eli being crap is also not my opinion but proven. So your unwavering opinion that Tui is a good centre, is also a case of a fan having blinders on and not seeing the forest thru the trees when it comes to some players. I will admit, that I do that at times but I doubt you will.

Again, it's the LDC. 50 years of watching this game has taught me that it's rarely going to look pretty for the Bombers in this game. It's the gappers Grey Cup game most years and they tend to rise to the occasion. Name one player who showed a complete lack of effort. Not what I was watching. It's all coaching, not a lack of talent. Got it.

The hyperbole is strong here. I see nothing that sets off alarm bells to me in last week's performance. It's the fricken LDC. We went to OT which is a far better result than we've had with far better teams. We don't win that game often. Like I stated before the game I don't think any of us should read much into the state of our team in the LDC. It's the toughest game on our schedule every year even when the Riders suck. If Brown were better he would be the starter, and there was nothing wrong with Zac's performance last week. I'm not sure why you would want him pulled last week?

KW is unlikely to wake up from his nap in time