Bombers at Als early chat

[GCn20]

8 hours ago, CrazyCanuck89 said:

You're not downgrading by playing Canadian, rookie LBs for a few reps.   Hamilton's defense improved when Veresuk got the nod at MLB.

Sure, therefore every NAT to IMP swap should be an upgrade then? C'mon...that's cherry picking. It doesn't have to be a downgrade, but it more than likely is. Let's be real.

15 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

There's roughly 60 reps a game on D. If Shay and Smith were playing say 12 reps a game that's only 20%. I can't see how them playing would hurt the club but I can see how it would help aid their development and help the team. If I am wrong, explain why.

Because 12 plays can win any team a game.

16 hours ago, Noeller said:

That's fair... I think rushing them to start and play full reps is unnecessary right now, but giving them SOME reps could definitely be helpful in Year 1. 

That's a fair assessment.

16 hours ago, Tracker said:

The big problem we have is the stubbornness  of coach(es) in using the same, obviously overmatched players again and again rather than giving potentially better players onto the field. It is not universal, as yet, but there is a growing lack of confidence in most of our coaching staff. If we here feel this way, the players must as well.

Because we feel a certain way about the coaches most certainly does not mean the players feel the same as well. We are fans, we literally are talking out our asses.

12 hours ago, 17to85 said:

So i wonder if our stats nerd radio play by play dude can answer... has Gauthier taken any defensive snaps this year? Cadwallader? Because if they have that's egregious.  Those dudes are teamers for life and any snap they get should be going to potential future starters.

Unless, of course, Gauthier and Cadwallader are better options at this point. 

[GCn20]

9 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

I see, so you're saying we only use 1.5-2 linebackers essentially in our defense and there aren't really a lot of reps for Shay and Smith because Jones and Wilson basically take them all? Doesn't that get back to our ongoing debates about a disconnect between the front office and the coaching staff?

No. It is not a disconnect, Shay/Smith are both capable of playing the WIL LBer spot in the future. Smith could even potentially be a S. What JBR is getting at is that there just aren't a ton of reps available that would be particularly suitable for rookies because our only consistent true LBer on the field is at MIKE and you don't throw rookies into the fray there until they are good and ready. WIL already is a very diminished role in our D, and you use your starter when it is only 40-50% of all defensive reps. 

I know that everyone here is looking for reasons to dump on MOS, but we need to do better than grasp at straws. We are a 5-4 team, there's a lot to dislike right now and we are grousing over rookie play time, and the 51-53 spots of the roster. Why? Because it makes minor decisions seem a lot more major than what they are. If we want to talk coaching we have problems for sure, a lot of it is our coordinators. 

Edited yesterday at 12:51 PM by GCn20

[Booch]

14 hours ago, 17to85 said:

So i wonder if our stats nerd radio play by play dude can answer... has Gauthier taken any defensive snaps this year? Cadwallader? Because if they have that's egregious.  Those dudes are teamers for life and any snap they get should be going to potential future starters.

Cadwallader hasnt...Gauthier haven't seen out this yr other than short yardage stuff...but may have missed some snaps....he has a few defensive tackles so not sure just credited for short yardage stuff or if he was in....he doesnt really fit the skill set tho we use on that heavy rotation tho....

[17to85]

2 hours ago, GCn20 said:

Unless, of course, Gauthier and Cadwallader are better options at this point. 

Then why did we draft those two guys if we can't play them in place of career special teams players? 

We're not going to win or lose games this year based on a handful of snaps for Gauthier vs. Rookies, but it might help rookies develop for the future which could help the teams ratio and overall talent level.

[blue85gold]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

Then why did we draft those two guys if we can't play them in place of career special teams players? 

We're not going to win or lose games this year based on a handful of snaps for Gauthier vs. Rookies, but it might help rookies develop for the future which could help the teams ratio and overall talent level.

None of the Cdn LBs are playing on D so no sense getting mad about Gauthier right now. Not a Jake Thomas situation.

[Tracker]

9 minutes ago, blue85gold said:

None of the Cdn LBs are playing on D so no sense getting mad about Gauthier right now. Not a Jake Thomas situation.

Thank God.

[Tracker]

 

  20 hours ago, Tracker said:

The big problem we have is the stubbornness  of coach(es) in using the same, obviously overmatched players again and again rather than giving potentially better players onto the field. It is not universal, as yet, but there is a growing lack of confidence in most of our coaching staff. If we here feel this way, the players must as well.

Because we feel a certain way about the coaches most certainly does not mean the players feel the same as well. We are fans, we literally are talking out our asses

There is no absolute way to determine the attitude of players towards the coach or coaches, but you do not have to be a chicken to tell if an egg is rotten. What is obvious to us yahoos in this forum about roster management and the repeated fielding of poor players while potentially better replacements (I'm looking at you, Thomas and Kolankowski), and getting embarrassed repeatedly has to be infuriating to players who care. Having your nose rubbed in it gets old real fast.

[17to85]

Part of maintaining a good roster is knowing when to turn  over certain roles, and this team is bad at it. They did too little too late and wasted a couple development years clinging to rapidly aging stars while not having appropriate backups seasoning behind them.

[Noeller]

6 minutes ago, Tracker said:

 

  20 hours ago, Tracker said:

The big problem we have is the stubbornness  of coach(es) in using the same, obviously overmatched players again and again rather than giving potentially better players onto the field. It is not universal, as yet, but there is a growing lack of confidence in most of our coaching staff. If we here feel this way, the players must as well.

we literally are talking out our asses

 

You, sir, are a medical marvel....

[Booch]

6 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Part of maintaining a good roster is knowing when to turn  over certain roles, and this team is bad at it. They did too little too late and wasted a couple development years clinging to rapidly aging stars while not having appropriate backups seasoning behind them.

I'd say worst in league at it

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

Then why did we draft those two guys if we can't play them in place of career special teams players? 

We're not going to win or lose games this year based on a handful of snaps for Gauthier vs. Rookies, but it might help rookies develop for the future which could help the teams ratio and overall talent level.

You do realize that you don't necessarily draft guys for immediate insertion into the lineup right? Sure they could take the 5 or so snaps that Gauthier has had this year, but is this really the kind of development you are talking about? What if these rookies cost us games? Is that a smart development strategy? This isn't hockey where you have 82 games a year with many of them meaningless to get guys some time. We are not in a position in the standings to be developing rookies in game. Any rookie that is going to get regular playing time will have to do so by being better than the person they are replacing or through necessity. It's kind of silly to be pining for rookie playing time when we are currently playing for our playoff lives. The goal right now is to win, not develop players for next year. Won't cost us games? We just won/lost our last 2 games by FGs. A rookie making a rookie mistake can definitely cost us a game.

Would I like to see our young guys get some time when a game is out of reach? yep. We are likely playing tightly contested games for the majority of this season though.

26 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Part of maintaining a good roster is knowing when to turn  over certain roles, and this team is bad at it. They did too little too late and wasted a couple development years clinging to rapidly aging stars while not having appropriate backups seasoning behind them.

What roles have we been poor at turning over? Who are the guys we wasted development time on? Name them. 

Edited yesterday at 04:48 PM by GCn20

[17to85]

1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

What roles have we been poor at turning over? Who are the guys we wasted development time on? Name them

Defensive line, linebacker was only done due to signifcant injury to Bighill last year, offensive line... and it's not that development time was wasted on specific people, it was a lack of future planning in those areas. 

[bb1]

MOS being a former Cdn linebacker himself perhaps may have a better idea where these young guys are right now? I just don't see why he would intentionally hold back CDN players and at the same time intentionally ignore rules that would help him dress more starting Americans? Which one is it? Is Mos not always criticized for being pro-Canadian?

[Noeller]

I think it's more about guys that have earned his and Youngers trust at this point. Now I know you're going to say "well they can't earn trust if they don't play!" but my personal belief right now is that Osh has guys he trusts to get the job done and that's why he's so loyal to certain ones. 

[bb1]

13 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I think it's more about guys that have earned his and Youngers trust at this point. Now I know you're going to say "well they can't earn trust if they don't play!" but my personal belief right now is that Osh has guys he trusts to get the job done and that's why he's so loyal to certain ones. 

Yea..what coach plays rookies ahead of Vets?  Not many unless they are rebuilding or have to because of injuries...or the rookie forces them to out of sheer talent. 

Edited 21 hours ago by bb1

[17to85]

Osh coaches like he would have wanted to be coached, and I have this big suspicion that osh wouldn't have appreciated a coach playing a young guy ahead of him. So if you're being an osh type player you're bullet proof. 

Osh never retired, that says it all. He's got blinders when it comes to long in the tooth veterans who made up the core of the teams best years. Guys like Wally Buono erred on the side of replacing guys too soon as opposed to too late. Osh is the opposite. 

[GCn20]

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

Defensive line, linebacker was only done due to signifcant injury to Bighill last year, offensive line... and it's not that development time was wasted on specific people, it was a lack of future planning in those areas. 

MIKE was already seeing Tony Jones taking about 40% of the d snaps from Bighill and the fact we brought in Tony Jones speaks to the plan to turn that position over. That was pretty good future planning really. Anyone else in the LBer crew? Some could argue KW needs replacement but we do have both Jones and Ayers in waiting there so again, future planning in place. DL, you have a point on Jeffcoat not being adequately replaced or the interior of the DL, but that falls on the GM really who has brought in pretty lousy talent through recruitment and free agency. Offensive line who exactly are you talking about? Bryant? Neufeld? because those two guys are still playing at a pretty high level. Yoshi is gone but Lofton is an adequate replacement. Bryant has Vanterpool behind him. Where exactly is the lack of planning for replacement. Unless you are just saying we need to get rid of all veterans over 30 because they are over 30 regardless of whether they still got game and that younger means better no matter what. Is that what you are getting at?

Edited 21 hours ago by GCn20

[17to85]

Bighill would still be starting if he didn't get hurt, we failed to have guys in place to groom. I know you like to say it's all on walters but I don't buy it because we've seen this team have an ability to replace players with rookies in the past. The problems are that we don't use the roster for depth, it's used for special teams players or situational players (like a 7th OL). 

[GCn20]

3 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Bighill would still be starting if he didn't get hurt, we failed to have guys in place to groom. I know you like to say it's all on walters but I don't buy it because we've seen this team have an ability to replace players with rookies in the past. The problems are that we don't use the roster for depth, it's used for special teams players or situational players (like a 7th OL). 

Bighill was in tandem before he was injured. Check your facts. I don't mind when someone has a fact based gripe, but you are ignoring the fact that we had already taken 40% of his snaps away prior to injury. How does that equate to him for sure being our starter if he isn't injured. The facts say otherwise. Sorry to burst your bubble but all teams use their roster exactly like we do, Why? Because in the CFL there are going to be guys on every roster that are just there for the teams because we have a small roster size and a NAT and Global minimum to uphold. You are acting like we have the luxury of doing both and we don't. no team does.

Edited 21 hours ago by GCn20

[17to85]

You do have the luxury of doing both! You can absolutely dress backups who can play special teams but are primarily on the roster for their defensive or offensive ability. Ayers last offseason was kept because he was the best special teams player but there were other linebackers showed better at linebacker in preseason. We dress linebackers at DE for special teams reasons rather than an actual DE who can take reps on D and help that position.  We have 0 for depth at receiver because they'd rather linebackers or dbs for special teams. 

 

No one builds a roster like oshea does.

[Tracker]

1 hour ago, bb1 said:

MOS being a former Cdn linebacker himself perhaps may have a better idea where these young guys are right now? I just don't see why he would intentionally hold back CDN players and at the same time intentionally ignore rules that would help him dress more starting Americans? Which one is it? Is Mos not always criticized for being pro-Canadian?

Among other things, yes.

27 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

MIKE was already seeing Tony Jones taking about 40% of the d snaps from Bighill and the fact we brought in Tony Jones speaks to the plan to turn that position over. That was pretty good future planning really. Anyone else in the LBer crew? Some could argue KW needs replacement but we do have both Jones and Ayers in waiting there so again, future planning in place. DL, you have a point on Jeffcoat not being adequately replaced or the interior of the DL, but that falls on the GM really who has brought in pretty lousy talent through recruitment and free agency. Offensive line who exactly are you talking about? Bryant? Neufeld? because those two guys are still playing at a pretty high level. Yoshi is gone but Lofton is an adequate replacement. Bryant has Vanterpool behind him. Where exactly is the lack of planning for replacement. Unless you are just saying we need to get rid of all veterans over 30 because they are over 30 regardless of whether they still got game and that younger means better no matter what. Is that what you are getting at?

I suspect that Tony Jones was brought in a a placeholder until Bighill could walk out onto the field without the use of a cane.

[bigg jay]

54 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

MIKE was already seeing Tony Jones taking about 40% of the d snaps from Bighill and the fact we brought in Tony Jones speaks to the plan to turn that position over. That was pretty good future planning really. Anyone else in the LBer crew? Some could argue KW needs replacement but we do have both Jones and Ayers in waiting there so again, future planning in place. DL, you have a point on Jeffcoat not being adequately replaced or the interior of the DL, but that falls on the GM really who has brought in pretty lousy talent through recruitment and free agency. Offensive line who exactly are you talking about? Bryant? Neufeld? because those two guys are still playing at a pretty high level. Yoshi is gone but Lofton is an adequate replacement. Bryant has Vanterpool behind him. Where exactly is the lack of planning for replacement. Unless you are just saying we need to get rid of all veterans over 30 because they are over 30 regardless of whether they still got game and that younger means better no matter what. Is that what you are getting at?

That's a bit revisionist.  We didn't pro-actively bring Jones in to replace AB- Biggie was already on the 6 game list (injured May 15) and when we brought Jones in after Edmonton cut him (signed June 9).    Jones also then sat on the PR for another month (added to the AR July 15).  He didn't see a lot of meaningful action until Aug 18 against BC (he had 3 tackles in 3 games prior to that).  Biggie got hurt during that game & again went on the 6 game list so Jones took over at that point (biggie only played 1 more game as a Bomber).

 

[Booch]

16 hours ago, bigg jay said:

That's a bit revisionist.  We didn't pro-actively bring Jones in to replace AB- Biggie was already on the 6 game list (injured May 15) and when we brought Jones in after Edmonton cut him (signed June 9).    Jones also then sat on the PR for another month (added to the AR July 15).  He didn't see a lot of meaningful action until Aug 18 against BC (he had 3 tackles in 3 games prior to that).  Biggie got hurt during that game & again went on the 6 game list so Jones took over at that point (biggie only played 1 more game as a Bomber).

 

yeah he wasnt brought in as an answer to anything or developed as a succession plan....he defaulted in as we had just him and there was an injury. Wasn't a planned thing by any stretch

He has picked his game up for sure the back half of the season so far, and does go full out all the time...sometimes tho he need's to learn when to slow it down cause he plays himself right outta position at times, but cant complain with his play for the most part recently