Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Floyd

CFL TRADE DEADLINE !!!

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

And Adams being a leader is a problem. Guy has been questionable with his effort from day 1. We have Dressler as a real vet in the receiving corps and that's it. He's out it's a serious lack of it.

Every time I hear anything from anyone on the team is that Darvin is quite but one of the hardest workers on the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

But with EJ, for some reason, change of scenery (ie anything but Montreal) might ignite him. Never really got that feeling with Bowman.

This is the atypical argument of change for the sake of change. Also - why would you gamble on him? We've got three games left - time for the team to gel and gear up for the playoffs, if you're bringing someone in you're desperate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

This is the atypical argument of change for the sake of change. Also - why would you gamble on him? We've got three games left - time for the team to gel and gear up for the playoffs, if you're bringing someone in you're desperate.

I think you mean archetypal.   I'm not sure that any of the names bandied about would have actually improved the team in any measurable way.  The only thing that a trade would have done is to satisfy the "they have to do something" itch that so many here seem to need to have scratched. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any spots on the roster in dire need of upgrading but it would have been nice to pick up a receiver for some depth.  We've seen the offence struggle without Dressler.  Ultimately I still believe this roster is capable of winning the Grey Cup if they can stay healthy down the stretch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mike said:

Dave had it right - we have no depth. 

Also my mind is blown on the stance Floyd is taking on this. What world have I walked into? 

One where I finally like the regime... and the coach.

You only knew the Mike Kelly-Joe Mack era Floyd...  that was back when you kind of blindly defended everything like I'm doing now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

To be fair, Nichols put up a lot of those numbers in garbage time when we were down by a bunch. He was also playing hurt though.

Uh, not in the 2016 WSF. Last year's WSF? Perhaps. But just like a year prior, it was the defense that collapsed and gave up a lead in either game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mr Dee said:

Nichols wasn’t the reason we lost 2 playoff games with him at QB;

2017 - 35 out of 48 attempts. 72.92% for 371 yards 3 TDs 0 ints.

2016 - 26 of 40 attempts  65% for 390 yards 2 TDs 0 ints 

Those numbers are very good.

Here’s the tricky thing about stats, his 2017 numbers are arguably better but the eye test will tell you that he played much better in 2016. 

The majority of those 2017 numbers were racked up after Edmonton already beat us to the curb. Of course, we had a pathetic plethora of receivers out there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Eternal optimist said:

This is the atypical argument of change for the sake of change. Also - why would you gamble on him? We've got three games left - time for the team to gel and gear up for the playoffs, if you're bringing someone in you're desperate.

Did I say sign him. That's why I said 'might' and no I didn't suggest change for the sake of change. You must of misinterpreted my post. With most things in life personally and professionally, we ask this question: 'Is there room for improvement?'. If you are being honest with yourself, the answer is usually yes. If the Bombers went through the progression of looking in depth at what was available to make their club better and came out the end saying nope stand pat. Fine. If they didn't and just said 'Stand Pat' I don't agree with that approach.

Because most of us don't work for the organization we don't  know what goes on behind the scenes when it comes to what their continuous improvement approach is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Did I say sign him. That's why I said 'might' and no I didn't suggest change for the sake of change. You must of misinterpreted my post. With most things in life personally and professionally, we ask this question: 'Is there room for improvement?'. If you are being honest with yourself, the answer is usually yes. If the Bombers went through the progression of looking in depth at what was available to make their club better and came out the end saying nope stand pat. Fine. If they didn't and just said 'Stand Pat' I don't agree with that approach.

Because most of us don't work for the organization we don't  know what goes on behind the scenes when it comes to what their continuous improvement approach is

By definition, in order for it to be a trade, we'd have to give something back to Montreal. Could Jackson improve the team? Maybe. But this isn't the time of year to be rolling the dice with an unproven player. Also, don't you think that might cause some dissent among the ranks?

As for the internal workings within the Bombers - absolutely we're kept in the dark. For all we know they may have tried to make some of the trades suggested in this thread, but we'll never really know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Did I say sign him. That's why I said 'might' and no I didn't suggest change for the sake of change. You must of misinterpreted my post. With most things in life personally and professionally, we ask this question: 'Is there room for improvement?'. If you are being honest with yourself, the answer is usually yes. If the Bombers went through the progression of looking in depth at what was available to make their club better and came out the end saying nope stand pat. Fine. If they didn't and just said 'Stand Pat' I don't agree with that approach.

Because most of us don't work for the organization we don't  know what goes on behind the scenes when it comes to what their continuous improvement approach is

With this I agree most strenuously. Even if we were to win the cup, I'd be looking for the team to keep improving, learning, developing. That includes kicking the tires on new players, coaches, scouts, trainers.

I do believe they tried to improve the team and decided the risk wasn't worth messing with the chemistry. If the losing skid had continued I think something may have happened. As I said in another thread, we have proven capable of beating every team in the league so far, except for Sask and Cal. Guess who's up next?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×