4 minutes ago, Mike said:

 

Also, one more thing to be clear on: no team has used a DI spot on an offensive lineman in any game this year.

Well that's just because they don't understand the CFL ratio rules like this guy.

1 minute ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Well that's just because they don't understand the CFL ratio rules like this guy.

Everytime I see this man I always have a craving for:

 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, Mike said:

The transaction page has nothing to do with anything, the 2-man reserve doesn't move from the active roster to a different area so your futile attempt to provide evidence to backup your claims means nothing.

Week 1:

Ottawa, BC, Toronto, Hamilton dressed 7 OL, everyone else dressed 6.

Week 2:

BC, Toronto, Hamilton dressed 7 OL, everyone else except Saskatchewan dressed 6, Saskatchewan dressed 5.

The pattern remains consistent for the rest of the season to date, with variations here and there for injuries. The other thing to keep in mind is that Hamilton and BC both have a backup OL doing their long-snapping as opposed to Chad Rempel, who is not classified as an OL so while they're on the roster as backup OL, they're essentially only filling that role in name only.

Nobody has dressed 8 OL this year. Nobody has dressed 7 OL AND a designated long-snapper either. You want to know where I got that information from? The official roster sheets that list game day rosters AND the 2-man reserve.

Thanks.

where on that site are you finding the game day 2 man list. All i see is game roster that are listed as un offical, whole rosters at the time of the game including IRs pr and inactive. 

1 minute ago, wbbfan said:

where on that site are you finding the game day 2 man list. All i see is game roster that are listed as un offical, whole rosters at the time of the game including IRs pr and inactive. 

Stats -> 2016 -> Post-Game Statistics

 

Waiting on that apology.

 

6 minutes ago, Mike said:

Stats -> 2016 -> Post-Game Statistics

 

Waiting on that apology.

 

ok im lookin, not gonna down load all of em but ill look at first week.

Just now, wbbfan said:

ok im lookin, not gonna down load all of em but ill look at first week.

lol I literally just laid out the first week for you, but if you doubt me, go ahead.

I dont see a full game roster on that. Starters, reserve and then stats.

week one bc cgy, no ol out of the 4 spots. I see one of the 4 in edm vs ott is an ol. i see 1 ol out of the 4 in our game with mtl being an ol. And 2 out of Hamm to. So out of 16 spots i see 4 ol. 

First week prolly isnt ideal to look at for that. 

Looked at week 7 i saw 2 in edm v ott. o in ssk v ca. 0 in ham vs wpg. The bc and mtl one is just the stat sheet. 

Edited August 12, 20169 yr by wbbfan

Mike I have noticed this "season" that you have had way more posts where you are trying to explain over and over to someone who simply doesn't want to believe what you have typed.    I don't know why you bother?

I actually snorted and shook my head as I see wbbfan trying to keep up with Mike....Christ......you kids, sometimes, I swear.....

11 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

I dont see a full game roster on that. Starters, reserve and then stats.

week one bc cgy, no ol out of the 4 spots. I see one of the 4 in edm vs ott is an ol. i see 1 ol out of the 4 in our game with mtl being an ol. And 2 out of Hamm to. So out of 16 spots i see 4 ol. 

First week prolly isnt ideal to look at for that. 

Looked at week 7 i saw 2 in edm v ott. o in ssk v ca. 0 in ham vs wpg. The bc and mtl one is just the stat sheet. 

I'm not trying to be rude but I literally have no idea what you just said.

3 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Mike I have noticed this "season" that you have had way more posts where you are trying to explain over and over to someone who simply doesn't want to believe what you have typed.    I don't know why you bother?

I'm trying to make a conscious effort to discuss things more with posters around here since there seems to be a contingent of people who views me as someone who simply attacks and degrades people I don't agree with. I can't say I agree with the criticism, but I'm making an effort to show as much patience as possible.

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

I'm not trying to be rude but I literally have no idea what you just said.

I dont see a full game roster on that site. It has the starters, and the 2 guys sent to the in active roster. No full roster.

In week 1 out of 16 available in active roster spots only 4 were ol. (the earlier point, not yours, that an average of half would be needed to bring the numbers down)

8 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I actually snorted and shook my head as I see wbbfan trying to keep up with Mike....Christ......you kids, sometimes, I swear.....

I was coaching junior football (wrs) and playing rb/lb just a few years ago. Ive had personal responsibility and an injury that stops me from being more involved in football, but then I dont know that youd have any way to distinguish actual football knowledge from some one who sits around and plays madden or watches games like an average fan.

Mike generally has very good insight into comings and goings of the team. Considering the amount of fake insiders the fan forums for this team has seen over the years thats pretty bloody good. But i havent seen any thing that makes me go, he really understands the finite portions and nuances of the game more then most. For what its worth i dont see him bullying any one. If he disagrees with some thing he sees he says so. And he tends to post logic based opinions backed by facts. Things on here got pretty toxic before the win streak with some kind of crazy claims from people not understanding the buzz words they threw around, or just beleaguering the team/players to any and all end.

20 minutes ago, Mike said:

I'm trying to make a conscious effort to discuss things more with posters around here since there seems to be a contingent of people who views me as someone who simply attacks and degrades people I don't agree with. I can't say I agree with the criticism, but I'm making an effort to show as much patience as possible.

Thanks Mike!  I always enjoy your posts even though I'm mostly silent.  Even if the other person doesn't begin to understand I usually find them very informative and informational.  

 

WBBFAN I wonder, do you really have to understand the ratio when coaching junior football?  I mean, if you are coaching junior football in Canada I would assume most if not all of the players would be considered NI?  Do they even have the ratio rules at that level.  It seems to me that it makes quite a bit of sense, the way we are currently managing our OL and Roster has been working.  It also seems to me that it fits in with the majority of the league and it also makes sense that if you have 5 NI OL you would need more back-ups as you have a higher risk of suffering a loss in that position. 

 

I personally feel we have adequate back-ups; and having the rotational players that we use actively instead of having extra O-LINE men on the game day roster which won't touch the ball at all provides extra value to the team.  It gives our guys who are going hard every snap a break and a chance to rest.  It also allows us to change up strategies; or try to get better one on one matches based on the weaknesses that we may be seeing in the opponent.

Cheers,

Tehedra

 

 

11 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

I dont see a full game roster on that site. It has the starters, and the 2 guys sent to the in active roster. No full roster.

In week 1 out of 16 available in active roster spots only 4 were ol. (the earlier point, not yours, that an average of half would be needed to bring the numbers down)

http://cflmedia.ca/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=628&Itemid=6

Any of the links displayed on that page will have a PDF that displays the rosters broken down by starters, substitutes and scratches.

12 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Mike generally has very good insight into comings and goings of the team. Considering the amount of fake insiders the fan forums for this team has seen over the years thats pretty bloody good. But i havent seen any thing that makes me go, he really understands the finite portions and nuances of the game more then most. For what its worth i dont see him bullying any one. If he disagrees with some thing he sees he says so. And he tends to post logic based opinions backed by facts. Things on here got pretty toxic before the win streak with some kind of crazy claims from people not understanding the buzz words they threw around, or just beleaguering the team/players to any and all end.

And just for everyone else out there, I think you're pretty much bang on with that. I have no football background to draw from and I wouldn't consider myself very knowledgeable about the finer points of the x's and o's of the game.

21 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Mike generally has very good insight into comings and goings of the team. Considering the amount of fake insiders the fan forums for this team has seen over the years thats pretty bloody good. But i havent seen any thing that makes me go, he really understands the finite portions and nuances of the game more then most. For what its worth i dont see him bullying any one. If he disagrees with some thing he sees he says so. And he tends to post logic based opinions backed by facts. Things on here got pretty toxic before the win streak with some kind of crazy claims from people not understanding the buzz words they threw around, or just beleaguering the team/players to any and all end.

What are the "finite portions" of the game?

3 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

What are the "finite portions" of the game?

The small un seen moments that lead to big game changing plays. Ie a guard pulling and sealing the edge on a screen pass that scores a td.

18 minutes ago, Mike said:

http://cflmedia.ca/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=628&Itemid=6

Any of the links displayed on that page will have a PDF that displays the rosters broken down by starters, substitutes and scratches.

ah derp i see it now. You are correct i do not see imp back ups, or more then 7 ol. You are correct I apologize. That site seems pretty good its a nice resource. 

 From the first and last week, that does however leave us one ol short of what the majority of teams are running, and with a similar deficit at DT who back up the back ups. That leaves us down 2-3 big bodies compared to most teams. Carrying a DI there may be far from traditional, but when your spread thin and lack production Im all in favor of trying un traditional. 

Having so few bigs is as un traditional. Only over all we havent had great production from DT or OL. And other teams arent threatening to and putting DL on ol. 

52 minutes ago, Mike said:

I'm trying to make a conscious effort to discuss things more with posters around here since there seems to be a contingent of people who views me as someone who simply attacks and degrades people I don't agree with. I can't say I agree with the criticism, but I'm making an effort to show as much patience as possible.

See the counseling is paying off...    

Patience...is a long lost art.  Todays world of instant gratification is making us all lack patience.   Keep it up and maybe more of us on here will find that thing they call "patience".

29 minutes ago, Tehedra said:

Thanks Mike!  I always enjoy your posts even though I'm mostly silent.  Even if the other person doesn't begin to understand I usually find them very informative and informational.  

 

WBBFAN I wonder, do you really have to understand the ratio when coaching junior football?  I mean, if you are coaching junior football in Canada I would assume most if not all of the players would be considered NI?  Do they even have the ratio rules at that level.  It seems to me that it makes quite a bit of sense, the way we are currently managing our OL and Roster has been working.  It also seems to me that it fits in with the majority of the league and it also makes sense that if you have 5 NI OL you would need more back-ups as you have a higher risk of suffering a loss in that position. 

 

I personally feel we have adequate back-ups; and having the rotational players that we use actively instead of having extra O-LINE men on the game day roster which won't touch the ball at all provides extra value to the team.  It gives our guys who are going hard every snap a break and a chance to rest.  It also allows us to change up strategies; or try to get better one on one matches based on the weaknesses that we may be seeing in the opponent.

Cheers,

Tehedra

 

 

You are correct in that I am not any where near as acustomed to the need to flex players around the ratio. As a positional player/coach my in game role was up in the box observing patterns, helping track plays, etc. You cant teach guys mid game, too much advice while playing or between series is either lost before/between the ears or brings on a shut down. I often marvel watching some coaches and the way they shuffle guys for various packages all while balancing the ratio/di rules. (not sask) Its not some thing often appreciated but incredible none the less. 

Adequate doesnt win a lot of games. Good is the enemy of great, idk what adequate is the enemy of  when we are putting DL in on OL and having to change his numbers to go both ways in multiple games, we arent ok with that depth. Can you imagine what would happen if the injury bug bit our OL as bad as it has our WRs or DBs? Good lord we'd have garret waggoner, trent corney, on D with jake playing boths ways. 

Im all in favor of positional rotations, especially on the DL, where most of the time you have smaller guys smashing up against bigger guys and more of them. But we arent carrying more DL either. We are carrying more Lbs. Who arent rotating in much at all. 

6 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

See the counseling is paying off...    

Patience...is a long lost art.  Todays world of instant gratification is making us all lack patience.   Keep it up and maybe more of us on here will find that thing they call "patience".

 

I instantly feel gratified. And Im not even a big GnR fan. Sorry reading that i heard that song in my head when i read patience. 

Quinn Smith (DL) is the 7th OL on the roster in essence for Calgary. Jake Thomas doing this for us isn't unheard of.

Shhh....I'm trying to concentrate on my Madden....

5 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

Quinn Smith (DL) is the 7th OL on the roster in essence for Calgary. Jake Thomas doing this for us isn't unheard of.

Eddie Steele does it for Edmonton too.

17 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

They have this thing called a practice roster. The issue is nobody on the Rider's staff can count. They thought they had ten guys.

The whole thing is quite understandable, really. The Riders are so bad at math that they cannot even tell the difference between 12 and 13, so numbers higher than that really addle them.