GCn20
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GCn20
-
-
20 hours ago, wbbfan said: If he improves a bit he could be a 1000 yard guy, but its hard to imagine him doing that on a good team/passing offence imo.
He gets pushed off his routes quite a bit, if he can make some hay winning more within the first 5 yards of scrimmage he could be a 1000 guy.
-
-
Edited by GCn20
11 minutes ago, bigg jay said: Yep, not all of the DT's on our Neg List are recent adds either - a couple of them have been there for months so it's more of an indication of what they are targeting rather than a clue that they'll sign soon.
Neg List moves are all over the map too - some guys sit on there for years & some only for a few days. Some get signed while others get dropped. Some even get dropped and then are re-added later on - recent signee Khris Bogle is a good example of that. He was added 2 months go, dropped after a month only to be re-added a few days later before he was signed (Calgary also had him on their list at one point).
Might sit there for years for sure. However, adding a few NTs to the neg list shows that is what recruitment is looking for. This is a recent development. Prior to the end of last season we never really had any true NT candidates on our NL. Like any other NL, or any recruit for that matter, finding them and getting them to sign are two different beasts. Phase 1 of trying to sign them is adding them to the neg list once you have identified a player you want to sign/watch their development more closely. If we weren't actively looking for a true NT we wouldn't be scouting them.
-
1 minute ago, wbbfan said: It is, but the thing about the NL is those guys could sit for 2-3 years or be removed in 2 weeks without an offer.
It'll come down to what kind of ends we sign and if/when/how many Nts/Dts we bring in.
I mean, do you understand the physical toll and wear that playing 0-1 and 4i puts on your body? The transition from 3 tech to 0 is extremely rare amongst pros, and non-existent for guys 30+.
They ran less 30 front in 23 in edmonton than we did last year. That year, they used Ceresna all over the DL in 40 fronts. That was also maybe the worst D in the league in 23.
I detailed a bit of the issue with 4i vs 3t. It is a gigantic difference going 1-on-1 with a Canadian guard vs playing the gap between the T and G.
We ran as much assymetrical nose based 40 fronts last year, and significantly more in all the years prior to 24, than we have 30 fronts.
We ran what we could do last year because of personnel. Younger likes 30 fronts, it was the defensive system he played a lot in as an Argo. I'm not saying you are wrong, just that what we are doing seems to align with his love of 30 fronts. I would suspect our 30 fronts wouldn't exactly be the traditional 30, more of a 30 using a lot more LBer blitzes, which is one of the reasons we signed JSK in my opinion. A Lber that can blitz from depth which Jones didn't show he was particularly great at.
-
Edited by GCn20
3 minutes ago, wbbfan said: None of the DL we have signed are nose candidates. We have added some to the NL, but not signed any.
Corney only got meaningful snaps when guys were hurt. Kongbo got more, but in roles not suited to development, Waggon was saddled to teams almost exclusively.
Neg list NTs added is kinda what you do prior to signing them. Pretty damn clear signal of what we are soon to sign if you ask me.
2 minutes ago, wbbfan said: He isn't a nose. He could play some edge in a 30, but that is pretty unwise for maybe the best 3-tech in the league, who is also pretty advanced in age and had injury issues last year. 4i alone is a beating to take. Forget nose. The most nose he would play is in cheetah pack 40 fronts with an end rushing from the 3 tech spot. Which we have done very little of the last 2 years.
Noo chance would Ceresna agree to come here to play nose, probably not even 4i.
With all due respect, you have zero idea what J.Ceresna would agree to do. He played DE in Edmonton when they used 30 fronts. How is using him at DE in a 30 front at all unwise? It is the best use for him if you ask me. I have no doubt he would play little to no NT in a either a 30 or 40 front.
-
37 minutes ago, CrazyCanuck89 said: They've cut their teeth on special teams. How else are they supposed to earn reps? How many reps do they get at practice?
You have to show you are as good or better than the man in front of you. Period.
Just now, rebusrankin said: JSK, I don't get the move unless JY has dreamed up a defensive alinement with 12 linebackers.
You don't get why we would bring in one of the top WIL Lbers in the league?
-
1 minute ago, wbbfan said: If you look at our DL roster as it sits, we have no Dts over 295 lbs. We have 5 DL under 250 lbs. And we have 5 guys who are 270-290. If we wanted to run a 30 base, we would need a couple 300lbs noses, maybe even a starter sliding lawson over, and some ends in the bare minimum range of 260/265-280lbs range.
4I, the edge in a 30 front is pretty brutal. It's very similar to playing nose, but instead of primarily working an undersized canadian C, you are always working the gap between the biggest imp tackle and a big guard.
That's where I see Ceresna in the 30.
1 minute ago, wbbfan said: I don't think we are going to run the 30 base. So it won't be too bad. But we still need bodies on the DL at every role and both passports.
I know we have some good imp DL on our NL. We will see what floods in the form of rookies.
Will be interesting for sure.
-
7 minutes ago, Booch said: In all honesty JSK is better and more versatile than Jones and Wilson at this point in careers...so this makes sense if he supplants one right off roster...and the guy he should is Jones...and allow the cdn rooks to get ..earn and maintain reps and also allow one of the intruiging guys brought in with serious upside a chance to develop...does Osh tho have the ability and moreso the acumen to see this and go with best combo based on skill..upside.. versatility?? God no...hes severely handicapped and biased in that regard
The question of who will MOS roster is legit. I am pretty stoked that Walters is bringing in guys that are legit enough to make him look foolish if he doesn't utilize them. No offense to J.Jones last year but JSK is a guy that if you keep him out of the lineup, then the HC has to draw some legit fire. If anything, it demonstrates that Walters is in control of who is getting signed again.
-
Edited by GCn20
1 minute ago, wbbfan said: Mos loves over achieving canadians. I have not seen him love the high picks and us school kids (Cahoon style canadians) He likes guys like Kramdi, we've seen a bunch of guys with massive promise who produced in limited use never get much of a shot. Corney, Kongbo, Waggoner, etc.
We have been a 40 Defence for 98% of the time JY and Hall have been here coaching. Would we have just brought in the best 3tech in the league to slide him over to 4i? Would Ceresna come over for that fit? Idk man, that is a much tougher role to play and far more wear.
IF, we are going to be a 30 team to the volume we were in 24, you will see a group of import nose tackles brought in, and another couple canadian undersized DTs who could play the 4i spot. We only have 1 nose on the roster right now in lawson. And we need a 2nd canadian and another guy who can spell him on the dl.
Imo, Jjones was as much a gap, but in an even greater area of need. As a guy who can pass rush.
We have signed a bunch of NT candidates this offseason through recruitment. I disagree on Corney/Kongbo/and Waggoner. All 3 got extensive playing time early in their careers and that was playing behind Westerman/jeffcoat.
-
Just now, Bubba Zanetti said: Makes sense. You really need a stud DT in the middle for a 30 front to be successful. Enter Jake Ceresna.
I think we will see a lot of Ceresna at DE in a 30 front.
-
16 minutes ago, Brandon said: Disagree majorly. They didn't come in looking completely lost and throwing 3 yard check downs. I didn't say they "lit it up" but they at least showed that they can enter into the game and at least show a general threat of scoring.
So a 2 game segment is your basis of 3 QBs? You can disagree if you want but the proof is in the pudding overall. Check out all 3 guys average completion yardage and it is dink and dunk numbers. Did they have moments where they didn't look overwhelmed? Sure. We got much better outings from Dru Brown than any of those 3 ever had.
-
Edited by GCn20
Just now, wbbfan said: I think Mike and Jack are more likely. Especially with the number of db/wils we have.
We didn't run a ton of 30 fronts last year. We cut our 30 front usage by about 70% last year from the previous year. It went from our base more than 2/3s of the time to less than 100 snaps.
Maybe JY will bring back the 30, but I think it was a forced evolution of our inability to get any pressure or defend guys in man. We turned away from it soo hard despite still having poor pressure last year, that I don't think JY wants to play a Canadian style of Fangio 6 cover. I think we will gear to get as much pressure as possible with 4-5 rushers, and probably rush the 5th guy or blitz as often as we play a 30 front and rush 3.
I would have agreed with you but I think that returning to more 30 front is why we paid big for Ceresna and now brought in JSK. At least that seems to be the most logical reason for what we've done in FA...and I don't mind it because we had great success with it in 2024. What you are stating is definitely possible too because JSK can be an effective blitzer. I just look at our personnel right now tho, and it just screams 30.
-
Edited by GCn20
2 minutes ago, bearpants said: Well this is a confusing one... I feel the same way as when we re-signed Wilson... I like the player, but I don't see the fit
and this is what makes it even more confusing... JSK is a better WIL... Ayers is a better teamer.... Woodbey is a better "utility" player... Jones still stays at MLB... Shay and Smith need to start getting some playing time... why is Wilson here??
Wilson is here now. Let's see if he makes it through camp. Shay and Smith need to earn playing time, not be given it based on passport/draft status. We play a ton of 3-4. There is ample opportunity to get them on the field even with the IMPs we have. In a 3-4 you need guys like JSK that are sound in every situation. I could see JSK playing a lot of MIKE this year.
-
Edited by GCn20
3 minutes ago, wbbfan said: I got a sick feeling in my gut that they are only ever going to be allowed to play teams.
They will have to earn their on field reps. If they are good enough to get field time what are the odds that MOS sits NAT players that deserve to play. Never happened yet. Everyone is looking at this addition in terms of a traditional 4-3 defence. I love that we brought in a guy that will solidify a 4 man LBer unit for us. He is a great fit for that.
3 minutes ago, wbbfan said: He hasn't been terribly effective as a pass rusher since he left here, but he does have the basic tools and sneaky upper body strength.
Agree.
He would. And I think he is finally 100% and stayed healthy last year.
Im not sure if he's a wil any more. Maybe in a pinch if you need, but youd be better putting in a DB especially a bigger one.
We went through that exact situation last year though
That might or might not be true. JSK being better is undeniable.
Glad to get JSK, I was starting to worry that he may end up a RIder.
-
1 minute ago, wbbfan said: Thats odd...
Right?
Now, JSK is a better version of Tony Jones. He's the best run stopper in the league at Lber, because he is very good at getting off blocks and understands how to body block one gap while waiting to fill another beside him. He's the only lber who can play 2 run gaps like that in the league reliably. He is better in pass pro, though not great, and was very good pass rushing with us but never really saw that use or effectiveness since he left.
The logic behind how we could still use Kyrie also applies to JSK. If we use him as a naturalized import, which he qualifies for, we could rotate him easily with a DB, canadian lber, dl Etc. Jsk, was also a demon on team in his first year before he was an every down guy.
Now having JSK and Kyrie, and Jones is puzzling. Unless we have accepted the fact that Jones is very limited in pass pro and Kyrie is a shadow of his former self and we need to improve.
This move does further concerns of a Jonathon Jones situation again though.
Also, we have the rookie Brandon Bouyer-Randle, who turns 29 this spring and kicked around 3-4 nfl teams and the UFL. He's a very high floor rookie at a position that is one of the easiest to translate to in the CFL in Mac. And isn't likely a Wil candidate with his NFL bulk up.
I am thinking that JSK will be used in a hybrid situational role rotating between WIL and MIKE. Let's not forget that we run a ton of 3-4 so he can be very effective tool for us there.
-
28 minutes ago, bigg jay said: Back-up vet In case/when Wilson goes down is the only thing I can think of. Not a move I was expecting...
Absolutely no world exists where JSK is backing up Wilson, at this point of their careers he is a MUCH better LBer.
-
12 minutes ago, blue85gold said: JSK is two years younger and better than Wilson, so I don't hate it.
Don't know why they re-signed Wilson still though
Wilson is quite likely in jeopardy of being relegated to teams now. I would think we didn't sign him to a very high contract.
17 minutes ago, Arnold_Palmer said: Don’t see how he fits in with our log jam linebacking core. I know it’s weird to think but he’s 6’1 233, would they consider using him in some schemes as an end?
More likely in at MIKE quite a bit.
-
-
6 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said: Can't say I understand this one...unless they know something about someone's health that has just happened? Why did they draft those two CNDs so high last year?
JSK is an excellent WIL. I am not sure why people are unhappy about this? This literally guarantees that Wilson will be a teamer. This upgrades our LBer corps big time.
- BigBlueFanatic and Brandon
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Brandon said: You are suggesting that you play guys based on salary? What if a team makes a mistake and overpays and then find out that the back up is the next Davis Alexander?
Putting in a back up isn't necessarily throwing in the towel. Change of pace, maybe the starter is just having a bad day?
If a guy is jumping off the page in practice, like Alexander was for a long time before they made the move to him, then the coaches will certainly give him a look. Like I said, if your number 2 is truly looking better than your number 1, he will get playing time. You don't need to force it. It is a fallacy that you don't know what you got until you see him in live fire. Live fire will confirm what you have seen in practice but if you are not seeing it there, there is very little chance you have some untapped potential hidden that will surprise the coaches. So no, you don't play guys based on salary, but you also don't play them just for the sake of giving them game time either...or at least not until the stakes are meaningless. If your QB1 is struggling, not seeing it that day, or for whatever reason is struggling then you can make a case for giving them the hook. However you never do that until you give QB1 a chance to try play through it. That is enormously important to the psyche of a QB.
-
Edited by GCn20
21 hours ago, Brandon said: I keep thinking about a few years back when the Riders brought in guys like Patterson/Dolegala/Fine and those guys were able to hop right in and play. They weren't running a dink and dunk 5 yard check down game either, they ran the complete O with varying levels of success and failure.
It feels like the Blue haven't done anything like this in years. It's always a back up QB comes in and it's just flat.
Patterson/Dolegala/Fine is not a very high standard of coming right in and playing. All 3 of them lost a lot more than they won, and had pretty pedestrian numbers. Sure they went in, but your recollection of no dink and dunk is not accurate. They were almost exclusively a dink and dunk offence almost to the point of it being comedic. The only time they would open up the offence is when they were down multiple scores and with a very low success rate.
-
3 minutes ago, wbbfan said: Out of reach is a tough one, that depends as well imo. If you are in a qb controversy, qb2 might give you a much better chance to win if changed early. Outside of that, yeah, the game should be cooked when you swap. That point, imo, is generally pretty obvious when it occurs. You see the ol/dl and sometimes the D in general just gas out from the exertion and getting their tails kicked.
It's hard to go off score to say when the game is over. Sometimes we've seen this team buried by 10 points or less in the last 2 years with tons of time to play. But we've seen other versions of this team come back from massive deficits.
I think you also have to look at protecting your QB1 as well. If you are in a game where the QB is being pressured/hit half of all drop-back snaps, keeping him in to try and throw his way to victory in a lost cause is extremely risky. If you are throwing to run the clock or running, you may as well have a backup to do that.
Dru brown became what he is by and large part being forced into games and coming in to clean up.
Also, after the field changes next year, I doubt we see the comebacks very often anymore.
That is doubly true in the CFL during this era. The thing is, you don't get to fully develop guys without playing them. Clean-up reps are a nice stepping stone to being able to take spot starts or step in early during a game. This used to be a luxury, but with the state of QBing, it's almost a necessity that teams identify and develop QB talent urgently.
When I look at what the QB situation in this league would be 1-3 years in the future, it feels like I'm walking through a graveyard and picking out a plot. Rourke and Alexander turn 28 this year and Brown turns 29, Arbuckle turns 33 and Vaj turns 34. And thats the young guys lol. Guys like Brown, Alexander, and Arbuckle might be flashes in the pan as well.
Qbing in the CFL, is worse than the CFL draft for being a crap shoot now.
The biggest problem is that the NFL is in the same boat down their depth charts and are now stashing more QBs on PR for longer. I think that some of the play style/systems of the NCAA offences just doesn't lend itself well to the professional game afterwards.
-
14 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said: 100% disagree. It's one thing if you have someone like prime Streveler who can be really effective in giving you that kind of look that can put a D off-balance. But for the most part you're not getting that level of production from backup QB's. They have so much information and pictures available now instantly that this tropey **** about "seeing some snaps from the sideline" and putting the backup in just to provide that has no purpose. If you have a weapon like prime Streveler (he was not that guy in his return from the NFL in 24-25), yeah use him. But that's pretty rare.
I don't think you'll see someone play consistently bad and not get pulled if there's a belief on the team that the next guy up would perform better overall.
The biggest and most universal fallacy in all of pro football fandom is the belief that QB2 or QB3 are somehow a better option than QB1. 95% of the time it simply isn't true. I will leave a 5% because maybe QB1 is just having a really bad day, but all things being equal if your QB2 is better than your QB1 it won't take a coach much time to switch those depth chart positions around. Coaches don't coach to lose. We had nothing behind Collaros the past 2 years that would have even remotely been a better option at any point and time.
-
14 hours ago, wbbfan said: pretty much average usage in an outlier year league wide. Lots of injuries to qb 1s, idk if any qb3 seriously stepped up. some teams like edm had poor qb play and flipped between two guys.
Has wilson had a great opportunity? no. has he had opportunities? yes. has he shown any growth, no. Is the whole league drowning in poor qb play, oh hell yes. Any good/easy answer for a qb2? nope.
Yea...and I am of the opinion that unless a game is completely out of reach you play your starter. It's why he's paid the big bucks. In the CFL we have watched teams come back from double digit deficits in the last 2 mins of a game on many occasions. This isn't the NFL where that would be insurmountable. I don't want my coach to ever throw in the towel on a game for the sake of getting QB2 or QB3 some reps. Just my opinion.
25/26 CFL (Non Bombers) Off Season Thread
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Walby played in a different era.