GCn20

I completely agree. Not sure what the thinking on that is at all. We need to get rid of guys that are not performing and old not young and excelling. Same goes for a very reasonably priced Redha Kramdi. He is a bargain right now. Booch hasn't liked either guy since day one, and refuses to admit both guys have turned into pretty darn good players....but MOS is the biased one...lol.

Combined income of 380k according to press reports at the time of their signings. Replacing them with 3 rookies you are looking at 220k and losing a NAT starter and all star DB. Probably not where I would trim the roster with the exception of Thomas. There are 8 other teams in this league that would jump at Kramdi at 135k. That is not a high contract for a NAT at all.

Terry Wilson DID play. Promptly went 0-3 passing. I guess we have all chosen to forget that. I guess we will also forget that ZC had two of his 3 ints after the injury tipped at the line.

Dolegala also had a year, not two weeks, to learn the offence that he was barely able to execute and lead to a disastrous record. Let's pretend his throwing stats mean more than win/loss though. As stated Dolegala had extremely limited knowledge of our playbook, had virtually no first team reps to get timing down, and has zero mobility or sand lot ability to make up for any of that. If we had put him in he probably tosses more INTs than ZC did.

Winner winner chicken dinner. The problem wasn't that we played Zach, the problem was there was no other viable option so that we didn't have to do so.

With the exception of Kramdi most of these guys aren't making enough over minimum to have a great effect on our SMS. That's not to say we shouldn't move on, but if you think there is meaningful savings letting them go there isn't. I did not include Holm because WTF? The guy is a very good DB. Also you have this huge hate on for Kramdi but he is worth every penny. Every player needs to be replaced by someone even the above and they all get paid salary too. Your savings are only what they are getting above replacement. Kolo won't be replaced for even a dollar less than what we are paying him, Wilson maybe 20-25k we could save with a rookie, Gauthier and Hallet are probably at or close to league min. We don't create meaningful SMS cutting the bottom of our roster. We gotta do it at the top and middle. Again, that's not me saying we should bring back any of those guys, just saying cutting them for SMS reasons isn't going to give us much extra SMS.

Totally 100% agree. You can have a number on a position group as a max but there should be no minimum. I don't like KW's cap skills.

If we see Elgersma starting next year something has gone incredibly wrong (injuries or desperation) or incredibly right (he just shows an incredible learning curve and talent). The former would be great but not likely. Our team has pretty much, since 2013 (with the exception of OL) not played rookie NATs in the first year of their contract and bring them along slowly. I think that is just fine. It has served us well and unless someone absolutely jumps off the page it is the best path for their development imo. Could we have given Shay/Smith more time this year? Highly debatable. On one hand, it would be nice to give every rookie meaningful reps, on the other we weren't in a situation to play fast and loose with rookie mistakes. We eked into the playoffs. If we were more secure in the standings my opinion would be different depending on whether or not they showed readiness. Brown showed well but it was a pretty limited sample size, and ZC still looked good....maybe not MOP good, but certainly upper echelon of the league good. I think this is a bad decision in hindsight but it is also the type of decision that could have gone either way. I won't beat up KW for that one. The contract he gave ZC....different story.

If we go shopping in FA, and draft well, we can be right back in the mix next year.

Or Shay/Smith would have been exposed and we do worse. Hard to say. Lot of it predicates on the belief that 2 rookie NAT LBers were ready to start. This is completely unknown at this time and therefore not a statement of fact but of opinion. Yep,,,I agree. Most here will say Elgersma the rookie, if he signs, and champion him to start all season despite rookie QBs rarely having success. We will ruin Elgersma if we rush him.

All teams say that publically. Elgersma will get a shot if he comes up for sure. Does anyone think ZC stays healthy for all 18 games? If he does we won't have to worry about whether Elgersma got his shot in year one or not. Proof? Not what I heard in his presser whatsoever. That could be mainly why he hasn't signed for sure.

I disagree wholeheartedly on what Dolegala might have done. He is a stand up, pocket passer with almost no mobility. He had extremely limited knowledge of our playbook, took almost no first team reps to build timing, and would have been facing a TO front 4 that was dominating our OL. I give him a near zero chance of winning that game if he comes in. We may all hate that Zac Collaros went back into that game, but he was the only QB on our roster that realistically gave us any shot of winning. Yes, in order to do so he would have had to be able to play through his injury but if I am the coach I would make the same call based on who was available. It's not like we didn't try Wilson, we did, and he promptly went out and laid a big fat egg. Dolegala? Not even a realistic option really IF we are truly trying to win. I get the gamble that ZC could play through didn't work, but at the time the decision was made it was the right decision imo. Anything else is laying down and gifting the win. The reality of the situation is that the second ZC got injured our chances of winning that game, no matter who we put out behind centre, pretty much dried up unless D and STs could pull out a miracle. Our offence was done. I don't think that's an unfair statement at all. ZC could have gone back into that game and we feed them a steady diet of BO and we had a chip and a chair. The problem wasn't leaving ZC in the game. The problem was the play calling once we had decided that. Buck never adjusted to the reality of that moment. We had all kinds of run packages, screens, dumps, go to the flats that ZC could have executed even with a bad finger. Instead we have him going long on his first play back in the game. It made no sense.

Yes, was our QB the highest paid? Nope. Was AH making 250k a season. Nope. I have zero issues with BO being the highest paid RB. It's all about by how much, and whether we have that luxury.

I bet if players had made more plays from 2022-2024 we would have 4 cups as well. My bet is even more likely than your bet to be accurate. Despite coaching let downs we were a play or two from winning two of those games for sure. No coach would have overcome the ZC injury. We had nothing behind him. Unless one has the incredibly far fetched idea that Jake Dolegala Or Wilson was going to lead us to victory. The last Grey Cup went down the crapper when Collaros did. He was the only QB on our roster capable of winning that game. That's just the reality of it.

I think that was the consensus on 2 out of the 3 for sure. However, many here lamented the Lawler loss for the piss poor GMing that it was. Ford would still be an overpay. Dobson, wasn't really considered an overpay by most, but replaceable with what we had in Wallace. That's why we are fans though. We don't get paid big dollars to make proper talent assessment . I mean read the forum for the past number of years, we still have guys that think that Kramdi isn't a good player. Walters does and therefore when we look back in retrospect, our opinions of the moves at the time don't have to have a great deal of accuracy. A CFL GM does not get to have the same level of accuracy as a fan, he must be better than Joe Blow.