GCn20

A lot of people do not realize that NFL rosters are as much political as they are skill based. There is a massive bias against skill players coming out of the CIS. Trenches are trenches, the big men are big men in any league but receivers/QB/RBs coming out of the CIS are rarely anything more than TCF.

I would sign UFL as well. Players can opt out of their contracts for any other league anyway,

I would sign UFL as well. Players can opt out of their contracts for any other league anyway,

Elgersma, and probably other NATs as well, would already be here if the CFL didn't have the ridiculous 3 year contract for crap money on NATs.
UFL pays QBs up to 100k USD iirc.
EDIT: 64k minimum contract with some making 200-400k. I would think Elgersma would be on the lower end. However, we just saw the UFL MVP sign with us to be at best 2nd string. I can't imagine that Elgersma has more earning potential that he does in that league.

He will understand the CFL game more than almost all the Amerk QBs. The timing and speed of the game will be the issue.

Not necessarily, but probably. There is a remote chance they signed Logan to compete at RB.

Yea...if the best offer you get is a futures deal it isn't worth it 99% of the time. Futures guys rarely make the PR. QB might be a bit higher than other positions but still rare.

Yea...if the best offer you get is a futures deal it isn't worth it 99% of the time. Futures guys rarely make the PR. QB might be a bit higher than other positions but still rare.

More than likely he is out this whole year....or at least he should be. Players do stupid things with their long term health, let's hope Dalton isn't one of them.

More than likely he is out this whole year....or at least he should be. Players do stupid things with their long term health, let's hope Dalton isn't one of them.

I would like his chances a lot more if he had more experience. Nice athlete but very raw. I see him as either TCF, or practice roster at best. That being said if he brings his lunch pail and works hard who knows. We did keep the marine for those reasons.
He will have to show some serious smarts because his lack of experience at his position will make coaches wary

Will all depend on who is available come draft time I would think, but KW should be thinking about rebuilding our NAT talent at the LOS for sure.

Bryant did show signs of aging last year, although he still played very well. The Bombers would be remiss not to have a backup plan in place should his play drop off a cliff, as it does with so many players around his age, but if he can come back and play as well as last year LT will not be an issue.

I did so only after the OP told me I didn't know anything about football but I get your point that others may not realize this was directed to him and take offense and that was not my intention. Next time I will directly tell him I think he is an idiot and leave it out of subsequent posts on the matter. Also the use of the word stupid you quoted was a direct answer to SF27 who asked me if I thought discussion was stupid.

At what point did i say that discussion is stupid? People have their opinions, and we discuss them. I thought that the idea of moving Stan inside as a plan was not very intelligent and discussed my reasons why. Is that Ok with you or are we only to nod and agree with things we don't agree with. I gave my reasons respectfully and the OP decided to get butt hurt and make rude commentary. That's not on me. I explained many times that my issue isn't with Stan playing inside per se, but with it being the plan which I think would be a very shortsighted one that would carry more risk than reward.
IF we go through FA, draft, and recruiting and roll snake eyes on anything better than that plan, fine, we do what we gotta do. I would think that to be a pretty big fail by KW and staff tho. We need to do better than moving Stan inside out of convenience. He is unlikely to be any better at age 40 and changing positions than a younger, cheaper OL we can get in FA or recruitment at a lower cost and with far more long term upside. Stan is going down the wrong side of the hill to reinvest in him at a new position and I know that hurts some sensibilities around here but it's just fact. Our very best play as an organization is to find our next generation of OL, let Stan compete for his usual job, and let the chips fall where they may as to whether he still has a year or two in him. If he is still deemed to be our best LT so be it. If not, we need to move on not reposition him. KW needs to have stud OGs and C in camp already.
All that has been discussed around here for almost 3 years is how we are holding onto aging players for too long out of loyalty. I am suggesting that doing so with Stan would just be continuing the stupidity and everyone who vehemently argued that MOS and KW are too loyal suddenly get in an uproar. I am legitimately confused by this inconsistency. The guy is 40, its not the time for him to reinvent his career.

In fairness to Logan, he never really got many return chances. I don't know if he is crap or not but I wouldn't base it on the dozen chances he had to return last year. Vaval stole his job and Logan was never really in the mix afterwards.

Little has changed with OL conditioning. They are asked to keep their weight up as a general rule and consume ungodly amounts of carbs and protein to do so. Tons have changed with the guys they line up against. They used to be carbon copies of the OL in the middle and were big men that could run a bit on the edge, now DL are chiseled man mountains that can run 4.5/40s. Take a look at a guy like Ceresna, guys like that didn't exist in Walby and Gorrell days.
We won't re-sign him if Vanterpool is the plan. He's 40. We are not going to sign Stan to play inside. It would be bad for the ratio, and would hinder development of our young OGs. It would make no sense. There is no upside to it.

In fairness to Logan, he never really got many return chances. I don't know if he is crap or not but I wouldn't base it on the dozen chances he had to return last year. Vaval stole his job and Logan was never really in the mix afterwards.

Ok...so you meant centre only then? Even worse. I was giving you the benefit of doubt because moving to OG is about the only position where Stan should ever line up besides Tackle.  Planning on moving Stan to Centre would be a massive mistake by management and coaching of epic proportions. I would fire both if that is the best plan at Centre they can execute. Anyone suggesting that Stan would automatically make a good Centre, I would ask them what evidence they have he can execute snaps effectively. Sorry even to a GOAT OT like Stan this may not be an area he excels. I've never seen any evidence he can snap the ball so why would I ever assume he would easily pick it up. Most guys don't.
I completely agree. All this discussion is for nothing. Stan is still rock solid at OT.

I can understand it due to the bonus, but I hope this means we are confident that Vaval is coming back

I'm not willing to roll the dice on Eli without at least trying to get a Centre in FA. There is a reason he never got into the lineup. I don't believe that if he was a better option he would have remained on the bench. The MOS argument is a dud because he has arguably shown more loyalty to Eli than most coaches would have after he walked away. If Marty believed that Eli was better I don't believe for one second he wouldn't have been playing. I truly think Kola was only intended to be a short term stop gap while we got Eli ready and that just never happened. I could be wrong, but it's just as likely as the alternative. My view is backed up by Eli only briefly being used as an injury replacement at OG, and then sat after playing horribly. I like Eli and hope I'm wrong but we have seen with our own eyes that he may represent zero upgrade to us.

We have way bigger priorities than DB. Pickett is a luxury we don't really need on a team that needs quite a bit of upgrading in some pretty expensive areas

I can understand it due to the bonus, but I hope this means we are confident that Vaval is coming back

I'm not willing to roll the dice on Eli without at least trying to get a Centre in FA. There is a reason he never got into the lineup. I don't believe that if he was a better option he would have remained on the bench. The MOS argument is a dud because he has arguably shown more loyalty to Eli than most coaches would have after he walked away. If Marty believed that Eli was better I don't believe for one second he wouldn't have been playing. I truly think Kola was only intended to be a short term stop gap while we got Eli ready and that just never happened. I could be wrong, but it's just as likely as the alternative. My view is backed up by Eli only briefly being used as an injury replacement at OG, and then sat after playing horribly. I like Eli and hope I'm wrong but we have seen with our own eyes that he may represent zero upgrade to us.

Little has changed with OL conditioning. They are asked to keep their weight up as a general rule and consume ungodly amounts of carbs and protein to do so. Tons have changed with the guys they line up against. They used to be carbon copies of the OL in the middle and were big men that could run a bit on the edge, now DL are chiseled man mountains that can run 4.5/40s. Take a look at a guy like Ceresna, guys like that didn't exist in Walby and Gorrell days.
We won't re-sign him if Vanterpool is the plan. He's 40. We are not going to sign Stan to play inside. It would be bad for the ratio, and would hinder development of our young OGs. It would make no sense. There is no upside to it.