GCn20

There is quite a huge difference between Stan being converted at age 35 and age 40. This is not the time to get extra years out of him at a new position. It would make zero sense, as I suggested earlier. Either he can still get it done at his regular position or we move on and honor him for the GOAT he is. Trying to stretch out a career by putting a 40 year old at a new position is very short sighted.

Knees and hips do not respond well to being reconditioned for an entirely different usage at age 40. Just getting out of the snap takes an entirely different muscle grouping than what a tackle is used to. It would be beyond moronic to even consider moving an OT to C at age 40. It's also not about the mashing, it's about keeping safe in the fray. 40 year olds do not have the flexibility to get rolled up on as an example. Relearning a new position at age 40 does no one any good, not Stan, not our team. If it was as an emergency thing sure. But how stupid would a team have to be to even consider taking their best OT and converting him to C at age 40. I can't put into words how dumb and short sighted such a decision would be. Moronic doesn't begin to cover it. We would be putting Stan at a position completely new to him, asking him to learn how to snap, how to use his body completely differently than all his pro career for what? The guy is 40...there is no long term benefit whatsoever. Like I said this isn't about his ability to get it done, it's about his age. He plays OT until he cannot do so anymore. Any plan other than that with a 40 year old player would hurt the team and be beyond moronic.

I would take him in a heartbeat. Christ we have people here suggesting we move Stan to C. Let's get a real centre so that we can end ridiculousness like that. It seems we are pretty desperate or at least the fans are. Or we can put the goat at a position he has never played, get him injured by the big men in the middle while learning how to snap at age 40. I could barely type that last sentence.

My point isn't whether Stan can do it, it's whether his body could hold up to it. It's not about ability it's about age. If Stan is too old for OT then it's highly likely he is also too old for the interior as well. If he is capable of playing it would be in his best interest to stay at OT. Not many spots open at his position in the NFL anymore. There isn't much for returning anymore. That would exclude you I guess. I could fit your football knowledge in my pinky finger but you are the king of eye rolls I'll give you that. I have never read any post of yours that approaches football intelligence. And lasted how long after?

That makes zero sense. Stan is a natural OT. Inside is more physical. You don't convert an OT inside at age 40 unless you want to end his career

Woods, Fox, and Adams are the definition of meh

A coach needs to be a good communicator, know how to get the best from his players, and get 100% buy in. What you did on the field is irrelevant. There are very few guys who come in that require extensive coaching in technique. If you got a guy on your team that lacking in technique it's because he's a beast, so you let him be a beast. Guys lacking in tech are shown the door fast unless they are a Stove type of player.

The overwhelming majority of position coaches in our league are ex-players who retired and had zero coaching experience beforehand. Your complaint is unfounded. Jake's not our DC for cripes sakes. You can count the winning HCs of 4 out of the last 5 Grey Cups among them Osh, Mace, and Dinwiddie all retired and went straight into coaching.

I disagree. I hate what we have asked him to do under Younger but he's probably the best suited DE in the league if we are going to continue that.

If they were going to fire Matty for imbibing they never would have hired him in the first place. Guy has liked his beers for many, many years.

I like Kramdi at S because I think it plays to his one big strength, his closing speed. S is a role way more suited to his skill set and I think he could give QB fits if he can read the play well enough. His acceleration in a straight path is as good as it gets. Don't know if he can catch tho...lol. He is not bad allocation of cash. He is an all star DB. Someone else in the secondary might be bad allocation of cash but not Holm. He plays the toughest position in the secondary and is the best in the league at it.

Yea...sorry Booch going to pile on...that post didn't even get a chance to not age well.

Kramdi is not nearly as bad as you make him out to be, but if someone is clearly better I like him at S. I know you don't care for him there, but I think he could be really good there with a little more time.

Yea...he is actually a pretty good punter.

Would be nice to have one guy do all 3, but unless we have a sure thing there we can't roll the dice.

I suppose it depends on where we are at with NAT receiver but yea...we could do it fairly easily without a ton of impact.

I agree. I would suggest that Vibert would be the guy if we go internal in a worst case scenario. Wouldn't surprise me if we went IMP before Tui or Vibert. American Left Tackles are crazy hard to find. Stan will be back. Kyrie? Probably not. Neuf and Willie almost definitely unless they ask for the moon.

It's done quite often. We did it with Bighill even. I can't remember offhand anyone else but I know this is pretty standard here and across the CFL. If you know a guy isn't in your future plans you cut him loose ASAP. Willie is 50/50 on whether he signs early or not. Couple times he did, couple times he signed just prior to FA. We are in no position to release Neufeld right now.

Their was a lot of dispute about whether that 400k was actually an SMS increase or went to player benefits. No answer has been given as of yet on which it was. There has been no official announcement of an actual increased SMS other than the 80k or so outlined in the last CBA. Walters went through this is depth last year with the media. If that will indeed be an SMS increase this year, great, but the league has not officially announced anything of the sort. The ratio does indeed make NATs more valuable and that is not the argument at all. I like Schmek...he plays hard and knows his role. They released him as a courtesy. Let him try secure employment elsewhere before the big fish swim in FA.

I agree on Castillo. Kicking is huge in the CFL and Castillo performs up to his contract. Those are the type of contracts we need to keep.

Say what you want about Barker, but the guy is a stud recruiter. I wish we would have hired him.

I agree on Vancouver, and it has been that way there for a LONG time. Much longer than Winnipeg that's for sure. We have no political will to deal with our downtown or tent cities. Not sure they could do anything even if they actually tried.

Judging by some of the recent contracts I'm not sure we have the same information as the GMs around the league. Kramdi at 180 and Katsatonis at 200k are mind boggling number that make zero sense unless the SMS is getting a huge bump.

Katsatonis at 200k per has me pretty convinced that there is a big increase to the SMS that's going to be announced. A safety making 200k...even a NAT...is ludicrous otherwise. I feel better about our signings now as this seems to be fairly obvious now.

If that means losing....so be it. If we are talking RBs let's talk rushing. I could care less that BO had a ton of touches as a receiver. That was a big part of our problem last year was that we overused our RB out of the backfield as a safety valve because we couldn't get it to our receivers. Mills was a far more consistent threat on the ground last year.