Mike Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 Just now, GCn20 said: Our top end talent at NAT is damn good, but our depth is not what it used to be. Our top 4-5 maybe. Our top 10 falls off QUICK and it’s not even close to the best in the league. 17to85, rebusrankin, Piggy 1 and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCn20 Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Mike said: Our top 4-5 maybe. Our top 10 falls off QUICK and it’s not even close to the best in the league. I agree. We could use a couple good drafts that's for sure. Ford coming back is going to give our top 10 a big boost but we could use another couple NAT studs. Edited March 5 by GCn20 wbbfan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) On 2024-03-05 at 8:08 AM, Pete said: Using the nationalized rule, doesnt mean you have more americans on the starting roster it only means you can play them for a limited amt of snaps in place of cdn. Your cdn backups remain the same. The third cdn safety isnt taking starter reps regardless. Not mentioned in this discussion is that the Natl. American rule did not fulfill it's intended purpose of extending the careers of fan favourite veteran American players who were no longer able to secure starting roles, but were still marketable personnel for their team within their communities. A player like Darvin Adams comes to mind. What happened within one week of the season starting is a few teams of low character figured out how to subvert the rule intent and twist it to their advantage. Both Calgary and BC demonstrated this in week #1, having established starters such Kadeem Carey and Dominique Rhymes listed as backups to no-name players who they replaced after the first snap and played the rest of the game, thus subverting the ratio as the 23 play count applies only to the designated starter. Same thing was done on defence as teams were permitted to have a designated nationalized American on offence and defence. Game #1 the Stamps used their defensive designation on veteran defensive back Branden Dozier, who started behind rookie Michael Griffin, the Lions subbed vet. Woody Baron in for Global no-name Tibo Debaillie after one snap. The blame falls on the league for failing to close an obvious loophole on a rule that may have had good intentions and been worthwhile. As the rule change failed to achieve what is was designed to do, it should be altered to more accurately serve it's purpose, or immediately be eliminated. Edited March 6 by Fatty Liver wbbfan and Stickem 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCn20 Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said: Not mentioned in this discussion is that the Natl. American rule did not fulfill it's intended purpose of extending the careers of fan favourite veteran American players who were no longer able to secure starting roles, but were still marketable personnel for their team within their communities. A player like Darvin Adams comes to mind. What happened within one week of the season starting is a few teams of low character figured out how to subvert the rule intent and twist it to their advantage. Both Calgary and BC demonstrated this in week #1, having established starters such Kadeem Carey and Dominique Rhymes listed as backups to no-name players who they replaced after the first snap and played the rest of the game, thus subverting the ratio as the 23 play count applies only to the designated starter. Same thing was done on defence as teams are permitted to have a designated nationalized American on offence and defence. Game #1 the Stamps used their defensive designation on veteran defensive back Branden Dozier, who started behind rookie Michael Griffin, the Lions subbed vet. Woody Baron in for Global no-name Tibo Debaillie after one snap. The blame falls on the league for failing to close an obvious loophole on a rule that may have had good intentions and se been worthwhile. As the rule change failed to achieve what is was designed to do, it should be altered to more accurately serve it's purpose, or immediately be eliminated. Just scrap the damn rule and be done with it. It just allows GMs and teams to be lazy in their approach to scouting, drafting, and developing NATs. wbbfan, TBURGESS, Bigblue204 and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 12 minutes ago, GCn20 said: I agree. We could use a couple good drafts that's for sure. We really could. Three picks in the top 20, we need to take a big swing with one of them if you ask me. Ten picks in total. We need to come away with a good mix of everything. Lots of good prospects with varying purposes at the top of the board. Would like to see them look WR (Mital), OL (Wallace) or even wonder if they’d take a look at a unique player like TE Tanner McLachlan to fill that blocking role or take a long term look at someone like DT Kail Dava (will drop, out long term with an injury) TONS of options rebusrankin, Bigblue204, Piggy 1 and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 3 hours ago, MOBomberFan said: Curious, who does everyone feel we should have selected instead of Bennett at 8th and Kelly at 15th? I'm wondering who the 'big get' that we passed on twice was this year. For the life of me I can't figure it out. Uguak seems like the early hit of 2023 and he was gone at 7. Bemiy taken at 9 might round into a better player by the time he's Bennet's age but til then he's currently statistically trailing Bennett and I don't recall him standing out in any big way. Just curious 🤔 I think year #2 is going to show last years draft class was not all that bad, eager to see what Max Charbonneau, Bret MacDougall, Jeremy Murphy and Jake Kelly bring to TC. I'll predict that 2 of those 4 eventually become impact players. Noeller 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbbfan Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 4 hours ago, GCn20 said: I`m not arguing that we didn`t maximize our utilization of it. Every coach has his own style and I hate comparing them because the differences between even coaches that seem similar are sometimes pretty big. MOS is MOS. He has some major strengths, and some minor weaknesses is how I would assess him. Yes, I understand the rule. Thats true, but you also can’t rate mos alone on our current success either. He was on the hot seat before the gc run. If we didn’t end up with collaros and winning the 19 cup, do you think he’d a kept his job? Would he lose it after another year? The hard thing with rating mos is he actually did more to make us win when we were worse. End had the same flaws, but his contribution to our teams coaching and play calling, and on D too. 2 hours ago, Mark H. said: No. The 2019 & 2021 teams had the opposition physically beaten down by the 4th quarter. They did, because they hated losing. The defence expected to carry us to wins then. Even though especially in 21 our offence could as well. 51 minutes ago, GCn20 said: You may be right, I just think that we need to at least give him more than his rookie season. Faith didn’t get more than that. Bennett was better than faith but still pretty lame. Honestly hurts nothing to bring him to camp. Aren’t likely at this point to add more than one ni de either. 54 minutes ago, Mike said: Genuinely not even close It was a laughable claim. Makes some of this seem border line trollish tbh. I’d say we are average ish in terms of top end and depth. But mainly because we’ve previously hoarded ni ol and that’s the most valuable position to have them at. But the guys we have are old. I’d bet our average roster ni age is the highest in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand1.5 Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 We have been spoiled with a great pipeline of O-lineman, it's a bit thinner than usual as of today, I expect and hope we get it restocked to our usual spoiled levels over the next two draft classes. We haven't has as much luck in drafting along the D-line, but IMO I think we can do better than Bennet and Schmekel...maybe one or both surprise but I am skeptical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 31 minutes ago, Fatty Liver said: I think year #2 is going to show last years draft class was not all that bad, eager to see what Max Charbonneau, Bret MacDougall, Jeremy Murphy and Jake Kelly bring to TC. I'll predict that 2 of those 4 eventually become impact players. Honestly just a ridiculous expectation wbbfan, bluedawg and rebusrankin 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbbfan Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 7 minutes ago, 3rdand1.5 said: We have been spoiled with a great pipeline of O-lineman, it's a bit thinner than usual as of today, I expect and hope we get it restocked to our usual spoiled levels over the next two draft classes. We haven't has as much luck in drafting along the D-line, but IMO I think we can do better than Bennet and Schmekel...maybe one or both surprise but I am skeptical I don’t think any ol we pick this year will be able to make an impact and be available to roster this year. It’s likely the new norm that you get ol who are a year away from being available or two years away from being good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebusrankin Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 I think Kelly could be a ST ace this season and Murphy likely gives us a few catches but I don't see a huge impact from any of the 2023 draft class if a huge impact is quality starter. wbbfan and Stickem 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stickem Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 14 minutes ago, rebusrankin said: I think Kelly could be a ST ace this season and Murphy likely gives us a few catches but I don't see a huge impact from any of the 2023 draft class if a huge impact is quality starter. Really like this Kelly kid.....keep an eye on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue204 Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, Fatty Liver said: Not mentioned in this discussion is that the Natl. American rule did not fulfill it's intended purpose of extending the careers of fan favourite veteran American players who were no longer able to secure starting roles, but were still marketable personnel for their team within their communities. A player like Darvin Adams comes to mind. What happened within one week of the season starting is a few teams of low character figured out how to subvert the rule intent and twist it to their advantage. Both Calgary and BC demonstrated this in week #1, having established starters such Kadeem Carey and Dominique Rhymes listed as backups to no-name players who they replaced after the first snap and played the rest of the game, thus subverting the ratio as the 23 play count applies only to the designated starter. Same thing was done on defence as teams were permitted to have a designated nationalized American on offence and defence. Game #1 the Stamps used their defensive designation on veteran defensive back Branden Dozier, who started behind rookie Michael Griffin, the Lions subbed vet. Woody Baron in for Global no-name Tibo Debaillie after one snap. The blame falls on the league for failing to close an obvious loophole on a rule that may have had good intentions and se been worthwhile. As the rule change failed to achieve what is was designed to do, it should be altered to more accurately serve it's purpose, or immediately be eliminated. It should be eliminated. wbbfan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noeller Posted March 5 Author Report Share Posted March 5 some real "nose of the plane is pointed straight down" takes in this thread for sure.... cripes. Not much in the way of expectations for '24... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold_Palmer Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, Mike said: Our top 4-5 maybe. Our top 10 falls off QUICK and it’s not even close to the best in the league. Yeah the thing is good Nat players are worth a premium, unfortunately we have to continue to draft good Canadian players because there’s no way in a salary cap era we’re going to be able to hold on all those guys looking for raises. The double edged sword is having guys who are some of the best players in the CFL regardless of nationality, like Brady and Demski, they need to be paid, in a perfect world we would still have guys like Desjarlais and Kongbo still on our roster but we can’t pay everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, Noeller said: some real "nose of the plane is pointed straight down" takes in this thread for sure.... cripes. Not much in the way of expectations for '24... I expect a first place finish. All teams in the play-offs have a chance after that point. MOBomberFan and bearpants 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownabomberfan Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 4 minutes ago, Jesse said: I expect a first place finish. All teams in the play-offs have a chance after that point. up until the last Grey Cup game I would have said..."nah"....but now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebusrankin Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, Noeller said: some real "nose of the plane is pointed straight down" takes in this thread for sure.... cripes. Not much in the way of expectations for '24... Are you saying I can't complain, jackass. 😉😆 Noeller and bearpants 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue204 Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 30 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said: up until the last Grey Cup game I would have said..."nah"....but now... No, it's just your opinion... in March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booch Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 4 hours ago, Pete said: sorry that should have been Ford. But I do agree that last year our back up import talent wasn't utilized properly or we lacked depth. ie. when grant went down we had to experiment with several players none of whom were adequate, and utilizing Jackson as an import was a waste. If they are looking to fox to be good enough to reolace walker why wasn't he given more opportunity. Same could be said for Haba, Our top 10 canadians are the best in the league but it does get thin in the bottom 4 or 5. Hopefully with 10 draft picks this year and the return of ford it will be better. I also think they like the developement of Charboneau after he went back to school ly I thought u ment Ford...but then thought maybe u had some intel on a dude...no worries 4 hours ago, GCn20 said: You may be right, I just think that we need to at least give him more than his rookie season. I'm willing to see what he has in camp....but if he shows no improvement from last year, then cut bait as he will be already 28......and the fact he showed no improvement at all last yr...leads me to believe that he has no upside potential on defence....We should have used him in the role we wasted on Jackson, and saved that DA spot and allow him to get extra reps there, maybe he can convert like Miller...as he was a linebacker...not a fullback 4 hours ago, GCn20 said: Our top end talent at NAT is damn good, but our depth is not what it used to be. I'd put Demski...BO...Neuf and maybe Woli at top end.....Eli if he actualy gets to play....after tha.t....our remaining starters are not upper echelon by any means...Lawso potential for sure...and hopefully he gets lions share this yr, as he has been stagnated for 2 yrs with the Thomas deployment...imagine where he would be if he was the defacto 80% of reps guy last 2 yrs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 12 minutes ago, Booch said: and the fact he showed no improvement at all last yr. That's not entirely true, he went from being totally invisible to once in a while being seen Booch and wbbfan 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbbfan Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 (edited) 3 hours ago, Stickem said: Really like this Kelly kid.....keep an eye on him I like both those guys. I don’t think either has ratio breaking starter potential. 3 hours ago, Bigblue204 said: It should be eliminated. agree 100%. 1 hour ago, Jesse said: I expect a first place finish. All teams in the play-offs have a chance after that point. It’s early, a lot can change still. But I think our floor, with good health, is an 11 win team. If we hit a schoen Esq impact rookie on D I think it’s a 13 win team. Edited March 6 by wbbfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 9 hours ago, GCn20 said: I don`t. I was responding to a poster who does. Thanks for chiming in. Anytime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 Joel Dublanko apparently getting added to the draft, he’ll go top 3 and probably not 3rd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geebrr Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Mike said: Joel Dublanko apparently getting added to the draft, he’ll go top 3 and probably not 3rd How is he still draft eligible? Edited March 6 by Geebrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now