We have been working hard over at the CFLHorsemen to provide draft content to hard core CFL fans.  Of particular interest may be my pre-draft analysis of the Bomber needs.  I know there are members here who follow the Bombers closer than I do.  Let me know how I did.

 

http://www.cflhorsemen.ca/2015-cfl-draft.html

It probably has more to do with you going thru 2 full rounds of the draft without anyone taking Waud.  Which is unlikely.  And you have on more than one occasion argued the Bombers should take him 2nd overall.

It probably has more to do with you going thru 2 full rounds of the draft without anyone taking Waud.  Which is unlikely.  And you have on more than one occasion argued the Bombers should take him 2nd overall.

 

Yep, basically that.

One player I'm really interested to see come off the board - Shaq Lawrence

 

If he's there at 11 and Demski is gone, I wouldn't be upset in the least if Walters took him

One player I'm really interested to see come off the board - Shaq Lawrence

If he's there at 11 and Demski is gone, I wouldn't be upset in the least if Walters took him

We don't start a Canadian RB and there's no plans to do so for the Bombers, so I think you gotta go best WR before taking an RB at 11.

 

One player I'm really interested to see come off the board - Shaq Lawrence

If he's there at 11 and Demski is gone, I wouldn't be upset in the least if Walters took him

We don't start a Canadian RB and there's no plans to do so for the Bombers, so I think you gotta go best WR before taking an RB at 11.

 

 

Don't need to start a Canadian RB in my opinion - he essentially gives you the ability to do three things

 

- have your thunder / lightning backfield combo without burning a designated import spot, if you so choose

- have a competent backup as opposed to a Carl Volny type if you're going to go with one feature back

- give you the ability to play a full complement of import receivers in certain sets (you could get Stoudermire in on offense, etc)

 

On top of all of that, he has starting RB potential. You could land yourself a legitimate ratio buster.

 

 

One player I'm really interested to see come off the board - Shaq Lawrence

If he's there at 11 and Demski is gone, I wouldn't be upset in the least if Walters took him

We don't start a Canadian RB and there's no plans to do so for the Bombers, so I think you gotta go best WR before taking an RB at 11.

 

 

Don't need to start a Canadian RB in my opinion - he essentially gives you the ability to do three things

 

- have your thunder / lightning backfield combo without burning a designated import spot, if you so choose

- have a competent backup as opposed to a Carl Volny type if you're going to go with one feature back

- give you the ability to play a full complement of import receivers in certain sets (you could get Stoudermire in on offense, etc)

 

On top of all of that, he has starting RB potential. You could land yourself a legitimate ratio buster.

 

Decent points, but I'd still go WR over RB at 11.  I'd love him later in the draft though if he was available; just don't like the idea of taking an RB that early.  

 

 

 

One player I'm really interested to see come off the board - Shaq Lawrence

If he's there at 11 and Demski is gone, I wouldn't be upset in the least if Walters took him

We don't start a Canadian RB and there's no plans to do so for the Bombers, so I think you gotta go best WR before taking an RB at 11.

 

 

Don't need to start a Canadian RB in my opinion - he essentially gives you the ability to do three things

 

- have your thunder / lightning backfield combo without burning a designated import spot, if you so choose

- have a competent backup as opposed to a Carl Volny type if you're going to go with one feature back

- give you the ability to play a full complement of import receivers in certain sets (you could get Stoudermire in on offense, etc)

 

On top of all of that, he has starting RB potential. You could land yourself a legitimate ratio buster.

 

Decent points, but I'd still go WR over RB at 11.  I'd love him later in the draft though if he was available; just don't like the idea of taking an RB that early.  

 

 

I'm not opposed to a receiver either although I'm starting to grow on the idea of Harty at 15 if Demski isn't around. In my opinion, Lawrence is a luxury pick. But seen as how we have the luxury of three top 15 picks, I'd use one on him if the board fell that way.

I've seen about 6 recent mock drafts and none have Demski going in the first round.  I'm starting to get excited at the prospect of getting a stud OL AND Demski!!! 

I've seen about 6 recent mock drafts and none have Demski going in the first round.  I'm starting to get excited at the prospect of getting a stud OL AND Demski!!! 

 

IMO, the Bombers are going to dictate the pace of the draft with their second pick.

 

We can safely assume that Ottawa is going to go OL. If the Bombers pick an OL then you could very likely see an early run on OL (which seems to be the direction things are going in) and that's going to leave a skill player on the board for us at 11.

 

The 6 OL (Groulx, Mateas, McEwen, Chungh, Ruby and Lavoie) will all likely go in the top 10 if there's a run. That means one of Durant, Demski, Waud, Ackie or Lawrence will be there at 11, at least. That's a win for us.

I don't see Demski dropping to us at #11. I'm full of cynicism though when it comes to things ever working out for us.

If we don't trade down, what I would think be best course of action is

 

Take Chung at # 2 (if Ottawa takes him which I doubt then Groulx)

 

11 - whoever is there of Durant or Demski (If neither then I would be looking at either SML or Akie) as either or would both be rostered and contributing this year with limited reps and certainly on teams.

 

15 - If Byron A is there grab him, Or Blair Smith, and if neither is there take a flyer on a Varga or Boyko

 

If we can do that, the rest is just gravy

 

Save for the signed in the NFL guys I would think the first three would make the active game day roster and contribute this year 

Wonder what the offers are like for #2.

If Hamilton came at us with something like 2 and 15 for 8, 17, 20, Gill and a 2016 2nd or 3rd I'd find it hard to refuse. It would be risky because that 2nd overall pick this year is as close to a guaranteed player as you can get in one of these drafts, but 4 top 20 picks and a good prospect would be nice too.

Wonder what the offers are like for #2.

If Hamilton came at us with something like 2 and 15 for 8, 17, 20, Gill and a 2016 2nd or 3rd I'd find it hard to refuse. It would be risky because that 2nd overall pick this year is as close to a guaranteed player as you can get in one of these drafts, but 4 top 20 picks and a good prospect would be nice too.

 

If that was the offer, I don't think I could turn it down. That's a lot of pieces.

Wonder what the offers are like for #2.

If Hamilton came at us with something like 2 and 15 for 8, 17, 20, Gill and a 2016 2nd or 3rd I'd find it hard to refuse. It would be risky because that 2nd overall pick this year is as close to a guaranteed player as you can get in one of these drafts, but 4 top 20 picks and a good prospect would be nice too.

If that was the offer, I don't think I could turn it down. That's a lot of pieces.

Except you miss out on a stud OL. That's why I wouldn't do that trade if I'm Walters.

You could still get a pretty good OL at #8.  I'd be happy with any of Mateas, Chungh, Groulx, Ruby, McEwen, or Lavoie.  Maybe all 6 would be off the board by number 8 but I doubt it.

You could still get a pretty good OL at #8. I'd be happy with any of Mateas, Chungh, Groulx, Ruby, McEwen, or Lavoie. Maybe all 6 would be off the board by number 8 but I doubt it.

That's why Ticats want to trade because they're worried there will be a run on OLs early in the draft and nothing left at 8.

We could do this, we could see that, a trade? Possibly. Come to us for a change.

An OLman? Skill guy? Who? Who? Who?

Isn't it Tuesday yet?

Tait says lots of buzz about the Bombers dealing #11 + #15 for another Top 10, in order to make sure they get Demski and a quality OL....

 

 

Wonder what the offers are like for #2.

If Hamilton came at us with something like 2 and 15 for 8, 17, 20, Gill and a 2016 2nd or 3rd I'd find it hard to refuse. It would be risky because that 2nd overall pick this year is as close to a guaranteed player as you can get in one of these drafts, but 4 top 20 picks and a good prospect would be nice too.

If that was the offer, I don't think I could turn it down. That's a lot of pieces.

Except you miss out on a stud OL. That's why I wouldn't do that trade if I'm Walters.

 

 

8, 17, 20, Gill and a 2016 2nd or 3rd , I'll take that. that's basically 5 NIs.

Tait says lots of buzz about the Bombers dealing #11 + #15 for another Top 10, in order to make sure they get Demski and a quality OL....

 

I'm betting that Edmonton might take that. Edmonton only have 5 picks for this draft.

Read somewhere and mention that Dillon Guy is on the supplemental draft. Can somebody confirm this?

Walters is doing a presser in approx. 5 minutes

 

http://www.bluebombers.com/live-press-conference

One guy I keep finding that I like more and more - Ron Omara

 

Tait says lots of buzz about the Bombers dealing #11 + #15 for another Top 10, in order to make sure they get Demski and a quality OL....

 

I'm betting that Edmonton might take that. Edmonton only have 5 picks for this draft.

 

If we come out of this draft with Groulx and Demski, it would be my dream come true.

Tait says lots of buzz about the Bombers dealing #11 + #15 for another Top 10, in order to make sure they get Demski and a quality OL....

 

Two picks in the top 10 and possibly securing TWO assets that could step in and make an immediate impact would be fantastic.