Flag Festus. ...

So ISO, that's a "no" on the logic suggestion then?

Man,I just hope Waggoner works out like some here say. And 3 years from now I'll gladly be eating crow because I know there'll be people here that'll go out of their way to remind me. . 

Waggoner seems to be getting the HENOC Muamba treatment here, lots of people were shitting on Henoc his  first year, perhaps some people put to high of expectations on guys and when they don't meet those ridiculously high expectations immediately, they are a waste really. Not comparing the 2 but... It's pretty similar the treatment waggoner is getting here.

 

Is our Oline bad? part of me thinks not really, part of me thinks we have 3 solid pieces, 2 of those happens to be rookies in Goossen and Chungh and ofcourse Bryant...

 

Part of me, a large part of me thinks our oline looks worse than they are because of our O schemes, MB really. I think if you  fire MB, you will see that the oline while not dominating, that takes more than 9 games really, they aren't as bad as they appear to be. I think the olines biggest problem is MB, outside of the one guard and center position when Picard plays really... but for the most part, they aren't as bad as they appear to be. 

 

This MB in montreal in 2007 thing with a good oline and AC, made them look awful, fired and the next year, they looked very good.

 

The oline has changed a bit from last year but the results are similar, it tells me it's not so much the talent as it is the Schemes they are running, that's on MB really. 

Going back to 17to85's original point.... to meet the ratio needs, there doesn't necessarily need to be a stock pile of NI OL... if we can find some good NFL cast-off o-linemen, there's no reason our 7 NIs can't be Bucknor, Hurl, Westerman, JFG, Kohlert, Picard, Chungh... with an o-line of Bryant - Import - Picard - Chungh - Import (or even Neufeld at the RT spot. I'm not sure how he played on Saturday, I missed the game and don't particularly care to watch the highlights...)  

All I'm saying is I don't agree with picking Waggoner as a supplemental pick then having to lose a first round pick the next year in the CFL draft. That's it. Funny how to some questioning the draft strategy of Walters is looked upon as a crime here. Or somehow it's complaining. 

I tried to explain to you how you needed to focus your complaints, but you just kept on with the scatter shot complain about everything mentality. That's why people are giving you grief. I explained why taking guys at non OL positions early isn't that bad IF you use the ratio flexibility properly and you should focus your complaining on that, but instead you kept on complaining about that, and the other thing, and something else. You really are a curmudgeon. 

One reason teams like to have 3 NI O lineman is because they can use 1 NI to back up 3 different spots. When you use your NI's at say MLB, you need a second NI to back them up or else you're having to make multiple changes when injuries happen.

One reason teams like to have 3 NI O lineman is because they can use 1 NI to back up 3 different spots. When you use your NI's at say MLB, you need a second NI to back them up or else you're having to make multiple changes when injuries happen.

Or you have multiple backups capable of playing at a decent enough level to get thru the game at d line, receiver, LB or in the secondary..

Kinda like what we have done. Fielding 8 canuck starters also makes those changes easier as well..

 

All I'm saying is I don't agree with picking Waggoner as a supplemental pick then having to lose a first round pick the next year in the CFL draft. That's it. Funny how to some questioning the draft strategy of Walters is looked upon as a crime here. Or somehow it's complaining. 

I tried to explain to you how you needed to focus your complaints, but you just kept on with the scatter shot complain about everything mentality. That's why people are giving you grief. I explained why taking guys at non OL positions early isn't that bad IF you use the ratio flexibility properly and you should focus your complaining on that, but instead you kept on complaining about that, and the other thing, and something else. You really are a curmudgeon. 

 

Not many are giving me grief.  About as many as the ones giving you grief about how you think O'Shea is a good coach. Not everyone is agreeing with your take. Look, we all have our opinions. We all see things differently. I like reading your posts. Don't always agree but that's okay as I still respect your POV. That's what this place is all about.

I agree with Iso, would rather have the first rounder and the shot at another top OL prospect.

Going back to 17to85's original point.... to meet the ratio needs, there doesn't necessarily need to be a stock pile of NI OL... if we can find some good NFL cast-off o-linemen, there's no reason our 7 NIs can't be Bucknor, Hurl, Westerman, JFG, Kohlert, Picard, Chungh... with an o-line of Bryant - Import - Picard - Chungh - Import (or even Neufeld at the RT spot. I'm not sure how he played on Saturday, I missed the game and don't particularly care to watch the highlights...)  

That's one stud NI (Westerman), one potential stud (Chungh), a solid NI receiver (Kolhert), a 5th receiver (JFG), a past his prime OL (Picard) and two guys on D half the people here want to replace.

 

For fun, compare that to Hamilton and Calgary.

But that's the very point isn't it? To try to get to the point that Calgary is at? If you get a first shot at a reputed good player, don't you have to make that bid? If you believe that player to be a good one, and others seem to agree, why pass on him, and take a chance in the next draft on an unknown player at this point? Why wouldn't you want to fill your reservoir with good NI players if the opportunity is presented to you? I get that we need O-Line guys, we really do, but I'll take quality players any time that we can get them, especially if we get first dibs.

 

Going back to 17to85's original point.... to meet the ratio needs, there doesn't necessarily need to be a stock pile of NI OL... if we can find some good NFL cast-off o-linemen, there's no reason our 7 NIs can't be Bucknor, Hurl, Westerman, JFG, Kohlert, Picard, Chungh... with an o-line of Bryant - Import - Picard - Chungh - Import (or even Neufeld at the RT spot. I'm not sure how he played on Saturday, I missed the game and don't particularly care to watch the highlights...)  

That's one stud NI (Westerman), one potential stud (Chungh), a solid NI receiver (Kolhert), a 5th receiver (JFG), a past his prime OL (Picard) and two guys on D half the people here want to replace.

 

For fun, compare that to Hamilton and Calgary.

 

 

I didn't say this was a Grey Cup winning line-up... but if adding more Americans to the O-line helps the offense we can still manage with the NI's we have at other spots...

The OL was such a sore spot for the team in the early 2000s too, but rather than try and fill the interior entirely with NIs they would bring in buys like Ibisi and Bobo and it helped. Part of the problem with this offense is that the running game is inconsistent because the interior of the offensive line is inconsistent. Why not use the ratio flexibility we have by starting 3 NIs on defence to get a bulldozer of an american on the interior of the line?