For some teams, the CFL Offseason is here. Rather than lose all the coaching movement discussions to the Regular season thread, I thought we could start putting it here.

Those teams currently lost in the wilderness:

Ottawa

Toronto

BC

Montreal

Calgary

Edmonton

Saskatchewan

Hamilton

The champs are here.. the champs are here... Winnipeg*

 

*Grey Cup Champions

35 minutes ago, Jacquie said:

Not a good example. He wouldn't have signed if he couldn't pursue NFL interest.

 

He said on the roster, not on the active roster. Teams can only have 2 QBs dressed on game days.

That's not the way i read Ambrosie's response, he states that fans were concerned that only 2 qbs were on the roster and he replied no they can have 3 its just not required to have 3...

my interpretation is that as well..you have to have at least 2...3 is "not" required as it used to be, so that spot can be used for whatever. But you can use it as a 3rd if you want to..some team will..some will take advantage of that spot and dress a different player they may not have been able to roster before.

If the Bombers are smart now, and Streveler is back they should designate him as something else, but say he is the "3rd stringer" technically, and then can play him whenever they choose with another QB on the field, or use him as QB2...Nowhere in the rules say that if your QB1 goes down you have to use your QB2...you could put in whoever you want technically...would be dumb as hell but not against the rules

Rumour about Dinwiddie and the Browns was started by a fan messing with a Cleveland reporter.

https://www.complex.com/sports/2020/01/cleveland-browns-head-coach-fake-story?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sportstw&utm_source=twitter.com

22 minutes ago, Booch said:

my interpretation is that as well..you have to have at least 2...3 is "not" required as it used to be, so that spot can be used for whatever. But you can use it as a 3rd if you want to..some team will..some will take advantage of that spot and dress a different player they may not have been able to roster before.

If the Bombers are smart now, and Streveler is back they should designate him as something else, but say he is the "3rd stringer" technically, and then can play him whenever they choose with another QB on the field, or use him as QB2...Nowhere in the rules say that if your QB1 goes down you have to use your QB2...you could put in whoever you want technically...would be dumb as hell but not against the rules

Not really because that 3rd QB spot is being taken up by the second global player. You would have to sacrifice a DI.

34 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

Rumour about Dinwiddie and the Browns was started by a fan messing with a Cleveland reporter.

https://www.complex.com/sports/2020/01/cleveland-browns-head-coach-fake-story?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sportstw&utm_source=twitter.com

This makes way more sense.

On 2020-01-07 at 8:50 AM, WBBFanWest said:

For your morning chuckle:  

https://leaderpost.com/sports/football/cfl/saskatchewan-roughriders/rob-vanstone-saskatchewan-roughriders-will-win-2020-grey-cup?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

From the Regina-Leaderpost lmao.

Their media in Saskatchewan is so bush. Everyone is a lap dog.

1 hour ago, Booch said:

my interpretation is that as well..you have to have at least 2...3 is "not" required as it used to be, so that spot can be used for whatever. But you can use it as a 3rd if you want to..some team will..some will take advantage of that spot and dress a different player they may not have been able to roster before.

If the Bombers are smart now, and Streveler is back they should designate him as something else, but say he is the "3rd stringer" technically, and then can play him whenever they choose with another QB on the field, or use him as QB2...Nowhere in the rules say that if your QB1 goes down you have to use your QB2...you could put in whoever you want technically...would be dumb as hell but not against the rules

I thought there was a rule that you had to always have a designated QB or kicker on the field, but you couldn't have more than one QB.

20 minutes ago, Sard said:

I thought there was a rule that you had to always have a designated QB or kicker on the field, but you couldn't have more than one QB.

I'm not sure anymore..too many changes..tweeks, misinterpretations...can't keep track

10 minutes ago, Booch said:

I'm not sure anymore..too many changes..tweeks, misinterpretations...can't keep track

Yeah, fair point... hard to follow the bouncing ball.

29 minutes ago, Sard said:

I thought there was a rule that you had to always have a designated QB or kicker on the field, but you couldn't have more than one QB.

Yeah that was in place to prevent teams from using a 3rd qb as a DI and having 2 "qbs" on the field at one time. Some ones gonna have to do a deep dive on the rule book to figure out of thats still in place. 

Not crazy about streveler as a DI with a 2nd qb on the field tbh. Its just too convoluted when we werent even running basic option stuff well. Our option package didnt have any read and actual option play. It was more to disguise the ball carrier and try to get the defense going the wrong way on the snap. Id love to see some real option plays but idk if we have the people to implement it. 

With streveler (assuming hes back) harris and demski we have enough ball carriers and potential for complexity. Id rather see that focus spent on improving our passing attack to be middle of the pack or better, and with out large gaps in where we can throw it. 

Not releasing the CBA for months and allowing an entire CFL's fan base to speculate incorrectly and get mad at the league seems kind of stupid as well. Numerous media reports about the 2 QB thing since last May, thousands of tweets/posts/comments from concerned fans and not one thought to maybe clarify. Kind of stupid Mr. Ambrosie.

Hopefully if and when Strev is back they do focus more on things with him as a true QB (which he is more than capable enough of) and shelve the gimmicky crap Lapo had him doing.

Let him be a QB who can torch you with his legs if need be when th pocket breaks down and or nothing is there as well as designed runs and option stuff...but build the basis of the offence around a normal game plan....you do this, and let him grow, with his run threat there, he could become lethal

It's still confusing.

3rd QB designated as a QB. Takes a backup NI's roster spot (Roster - QB's - Imports - DI's - Globals = NI's). Also means that the other special QB rules still apply to the 3rd QB.

3rd QB not designated as a QB. 3rd QB is a DI and the other QB rules don't apply.

3rd QB on the roster as the reserve. Can be on the roster, but can't dress for games.

 

On 2020-01-06 at 6:03 PM, Piggy 1 said:

I thought RC's area of expertise was offense? What am I missing/not getting here?

you're simply mistaken... Campbell is a defensive coach...

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

Not releasing the CBA for months and allowing an entire CFL's fan base to speculate incorrectly and get mad at the league seems kind of stupid as well. Numerous media reports about the 2 QB thing since last May, thousands of tweets/posts/comments from concerned fans and not one thought to maybe clarify. Kind of stupid Mr. Ambrosie.

I dont know. I think we (people who are on this board) over exaggerate things sometimes. I'd say most fans or the casual fans didnt really give a **** about waiting on the CBA. I dont think the league held it back because they just wanted too, they likely had to cross some T's and dot some I's. And then with the NFL doing what they did with CFL players under contract that may have delayed things as well if changes needed to be made. (All speculation fyi). For what it's worth. I was never upset at all about the CBA being delayed. It 100% wasnt even on my radar.

4 hours ago, Booch said:

my interpretation is that as well..you have to have at least 2...3 is "not" required as it used to be, so that spot can be used for whatever. But you can use it as a 3rd if you want to..some team will..some will take advantage of that spot and dress a different player they may not have been able to roster before.

If the Bombers are smart now, and Streveler is back they should designate him as something else, but say he is the "3rd stringer" technically, and then can play him whenever they choose with another QB on the field, or use him as QB2...Nowhere in the rules say that if your QB1 goes down you have to use your QB2...you could put in whoever you want technically...would be dumb as hell but not against the rules

Another kick to the nuts of any Canadian qb out there that think the CFL is finally getting serious about developing them. 

34 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Another kick to the nuts of any Canadian qb out there that think the CFL is finally getting serious about developing them. 

Why should the CFL waste it's limited resources on them? Seriously, I can't understand the infatuation some people have with wanting NAT QBs. If one comes along that is good enough, LEGITIMATELY good enough, teams will develop them. Until then best QB available is the only way a QB driven league survives. Screw this idea of welfare roster spots for NAT QBs. That's how teams end up with a Brandon Bridge torpedoing a season in the playoffs.

The reason we haven't had NAT QBs, or at least decent ones, is not because the CFL didn't develop them it's because our minor football. and university programs didn't develop them well enough. Once you get to the pro level you either compete legitimately for a roster spot or you never will. That's the reality. There just isn't enough QB talent in our systems compared to the US.

Edited January 8, 20206 yr by GCn20

28 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Another kick to the nuts of any Canadian qb out there that think the CFL is finally getting serious about developing them. 

Not really. A NI QB at #3 might not be designated as a QB. Designating them as any other position would make them an NI which would be good for development.

https://3downnation.com/2020/01/08/cflpa-sends-memo-to-players-detailing-changes-to-cba/
 

Can somebody make sense of the new nationalized American rules. It seems like America vets will be able to qualify as Canadians in the starting ratio. But further down it talks about 10 National starters in total. 

Edited January 8, 20206 yr by Colin Unger

Prior to a game you can declare 10 National starters...7 of which are the standard true nationals, but the 3 others who meet the requirements can be added as Nationals and sub in freely in the injury situation..

1 hour ago, Colin Unger said:

https://3downnation.com/2020/01/08/cflpa-sends-memo-to-players-detailing-changes-to-cba/
 

Can somebody make sense of the new nationalized American rules. It seems like America vets will be able to qualify as Canadians in the starting ratio. But further down it talks about 10 National starters in total. 

all of this was explained last year.......it's still 7 Canadians, but now "veteran" Americans will be given special status to hopefully help extend their careers....

7 minutes ago, Noeller said:

all of this was explained last year.......it's still 7 Canadians, but now "veteran" Americans will be given special status to hopefully help extend their careers....

The CFL has too many 'special' statuses. Imports, DI's, Non-Import, Globals, QB's and now quasi-NI Imports. Just give me NI's (7 minimum to be maintained) and  non-NI's. That's all we really need.

There seems to still be no answer to the concern over faked injuries. You know..  A guy like Thomas Miles is listed as the starter at middle linebacker and Bighill is one of the Nationalised Americans.  Miles fakes and injury on the opening kick off and then Bighill replaces him.   What im looking for is the specific details on how this will work. 

21 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Questionable taste in scarves as well. For a guy who played so many years in the CFL I'm shocked about the way he's running the league from changing rules on the fly to this CFL 2.0 thing.  There seems to be no real plan on how he's doing things. Just flying by the seat of his pants. 

His ideas, like his scarves, probably belong to Mrs. Ambrosie.

1 hour ago, Colin Unger said:

There seems to still be no answer to the concern over faked injuries. You know..  A guy like Thomas Miles is listed as the starter at middle linebacker and Bighill is one of the Nationalised Americans.  Miles fakes and injury on the opening kick off and then Bighill replaces him.   What im looking for is the specific details on how this will work. 

Think the rosters being so small that you can’t mess with your 4 DIs by faking a injury.