Jump to content

How does our week 2 roster shape up?


Mike

Recommended Posts

In this scenario, I'm operating under the assumption that Mo Leggett isn't going to play for us in our first game.

QB - Nichols, Davis, LeFevour

RB - Harris, Flanders, Normand, Rush, Miller

REC - Adams, Dressler, Denmark, Lankford, Feoli-Gudino, Coates

OL - Bryant, Bond, Goossen, Chungh, Hardrick, Neufeld, Couture

DE - Westerman, Okpalaugo, Jeffcoat, Corney

DT - Nevis, Johnson, Thomas, Ekakitie

LB - Wild, Hurl, Carmichael, Miles, Briggs, Gauthier

DB - Alexander, Randle, Heath, Johnson, Fogg

S - Loffler, Jones

K - Medlock

LS - Rempel

Not sure that at this point in time, that makes total sense for us. Fogg, Medlock, Jeffcoat and Flanders as designated imports sounds great, but I'm not thrilled with Lankford starting. I see him in the lineup somehow though, so I don't think they DI him and start Washington - although I am optimistic that it's a possibility, since O'Shea singled Washington out as a guy who made Stafford expendable yesterday.

If I had it my way ... Washington replaces Lankford, who isn't even on the roster at all and they swap out Couture (2-man reserve) and put Yachison on the active roster. But if Leggett starts, where does Carmichael fit in? I still want him on the field, but you can't have Flanders, Carmichael, Fogg, Jeffcoat and Medlock all playing. Would Fogg sit?

So many questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until we see how the defense pans out I would think Flanders doesn't make the active game roster in lieu of Knox, or Carmichael if Leggett is ready and and DI one of them.

I would leave Lankford off for now...Start with Washington and DI Fogg as returner/extra D-back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Booch said:

Until we see how the defense pans out I would think Flanders doesn't make the active game roster in lieu of Knox, or Carmichael if Leggett is ready and and DI one of them.

I would leave Lankford off for now...Start with Washington and DI Fogg as returner/extra D-back

That would make sense too, I'd be okay with that. I'm a big Flanders fan, but he's a luxury at this point more than likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Flanders really sold himself on me this TC and actually improved his game, so great depth and yeah, prob a luxury right now until we sort out the defence.

Though I'm not sure why we havn't schemed to have offensive sets with Flanders in the backfield and Harris swap out with the canuck receiver and bring in Normand as tight end...and at times actually utilize the TE with passing plays as to keep the defenses honest and not key on anyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Booch said:

Also we need to develop a stud new reciever so in my books Washington starts...cuts his teeth and grows during the season...not get used sparingly, or jumps on and off the roster

Yes... I think Washington starts right out of the gate but I think Lankford makes the roster as a DI.

Then your DI's are Fogg, Lankford, Jeffcoat, and Medlock.

QB - Nichols, Davis, LeFevour
RB - Harris, Normand, Rush, Miller
REC - Adams, Dressler, Denmark, Washington, Feoli-Gudino, Lankford, Coates
OL - Bryant, Bond, Goossen, Chungh, Hardrick, Neufeld, Couture
DE - Westerman, Okpalaugo, Jeffcoat, Corney
DT - Nevis, Johnson, Thomas, Ekakitie
LB - Wild, Hurl, Carmichael, Miles, Briggs, Gauthier
DB - Alexander, Randle, Heath, Johnson, Fogg
S - Loffler, Jones
K - Medlock
LS - Rempel

Edited by Atomic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that roster looks like what I would hope/think they do.

 

Tho I think perhaps they only dress one extra o-lineman, or did Osh say they are dressing 7 this year? The extra special teams foot soldier would prob give us more bang for our buck with the use of that 44th guy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Booch said:

Yeah that roster looks like what I would hope/think they do.

 

Tho I think perhaps they only dress one extra o-lineman, or did Osh say they are dressing 7 this year? The extra special teams foot soldier would prob give us more bang for our buck with the use of that 44th guy...

Just basing that off who's on the roster right now. We literally don't have another Canadian on there at this moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True...that is true...I'm guessing that if Conteh was healthy he would be on the roster as a special teams guy to get his feet wet..Renaud too from what I have seen is great on teams...high energy...gets his nose dirty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Booch said:

True...that is true...I'm guessing that if Conteh was healthy he would be on the roster as a special teams guy to get his feet wet..Renaud too from what I have seen is great on teams...high energy...gets his nose dirty

Yes... personally I would bring Yachison off the PR as the seventh receiver, leave off Lankford, and dress Knox as a DI.  Fogg can handle return duties with Denmark/Dressler/JFG/Harris as a second kick returner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Yes... personally I would bring Yachison off the PR as the seventh receiver, leave off Lankford, and dress Knox as a DI.  Fogg can handle return duties with Denmark/Dressler/JFG/Harris as a second kick returner.

I don't like any of these guys are returners - too much risk of injury for so-so results on the return. Lankford isn't it either. We miss McDuffie. There's no one on this roster right now who could be considered a legit return threat. I know Lankford did it vs Sask but that was pre-season. Therefore, yes, leave Lankford off and for sure dress Yachison. And then go and find a legit returner. Unless that is Thorpe, when healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Doublezero said:

I don't like any of these guys are returners - too much risk of injury for so-so results on the return. Lankford isn't it either. We miss McDuffie. There's no one on this roster right now who could be considered a legit return threat. I know Lankford did it vs Sask but that was pre-season. Therefore, yes, leave Lankford off and for sure dress Yachison. And then go and find a legit returner. Unless that is Thorpe, when healthy.

I see Fogg doing all the return duties with those other guys maybe returning one or two kickoffs per game collectively.  Not that risky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Booch said:

Yeah, Flanders really sold himself on me this TC and actually improved his game, so great depth and yeah, prob a luxury right now until we sort out the defence.

Though I'm not sure why we havn't schemed to have offensive sets with Flanders in the backfield and Harris swap out with the canuck receiver and bring in Normand as tight end...and at times actually utilize the TE with passing plays as to keep the defenses honest and not key on anyone

Actually they did have Harris rotating in at receiver at times during camp. Although the direct swap out wasn't made between him and Flanders, I do believe that when we are able to get Flanders in the lineup that we may see this happen. I don't think we have the luxury of Flanders in game one, but I believe we will find a way to get him onto the 44 this year for some games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Booch said:

Though I'm not sure why we havn't schemed to have offensive sets with Flanders in the backfield and Harris swap out with the canuck receiver and bring in Normand as tight end...and at times actually utilize the TE with passing plays as to keep the defenses honest and not key on anyone

heard an interview with Paul La Police in which he said he would like to get Flanders and Harris on the field at the same time. 

you've just figured out one way to do it. They did have Harris playing receiver a bit in training camp.

edit..... already been said above.

Edited by Mark F
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mark F said:

heard an interview with Paul La Police in which he said he would like to get Flanders and Harris on the field at the same time. 

you've just figured out one way to do it. They did have Harris playing receiver a bit in training camp.

edit..... already been said above.

If Harris is in at receiver, he'll draw so much attention. Anytime he moves, he would have to draw attention. That would free up a handoff to Flanders or some sort of play action.

So many things open up when you have skilled runners like Harris and Flanders both on the field. Can't do it all the time but you can throw it in when the d is already a bit tired and weary. Then, watch them make mistakes and leave someone open for a big gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...