Mike

-- Doesn't plan to spy Lefevour on Thursday, says they'll just have to tackle better than they did vs Reilly. -- Somebody asking if Willy is 100% ... MOS answers that once camp breaks, no player is 100% but what he wants are guys who give full effort even if they're nicked. Says he expects guys will play hurt, noting difference between playing hurt and playing injured.

Listening for the first time in a while so I'll try to recap as we go ... -- MOS was asked about any regrets re: cutting Ford. Said no due to his injuries and pointed out Grigsby 2nd in rushing league wide (not a good sign for us Cotton fans)

I'm going on vacation until next Thursday so I'm going to make my next two picks. WEEK 6 - Aaron Woods WEEK 7 - If I'm still alive Jeff Fuller

Geno Smith plays for the Jets. That's what I said... LOL! Dave Meggett played for the New York football club with blue helmets. I got confused by the part where you said they had a black QB.

Geno Smith plays for the Jets.

MCGUFFIE HYPE TRAIN Honestly, I'd like to see him go in for Romby Bryant if Aaron Kelly isn't ready.

Louie Richardson. Mike Cornell. Teague Sherman. Matt Bucknor. 41 tackles 2 sacks 3 forced fumbles 2 tackles for losses 3 pass knockdowns That's what those 4 guys have brought to the table this season after careers that totaled 82 games dressed and 51 tackles as their only stats registered in a defensive setting. 4 guys who were all undrafted. I'm not about to proclaim any of them to be 2014 CFL All Stars, but these 4 guys are taking a considerable amount of defensive reps this season and while they're not lighting the league on fire, they're proving to be contributing members to one of the league's toughest defenses. Some may suggest this is just Gary Etcheverry being Gary Etcheverry, but I think it has a lot to do with Mike O'Shea and Kyle Walters. These are guys who want that lunch bucket mentality. I truly think O'Shea means it when he believes his roster consists of 44 starters on a weekly basis. Guys like Richardson and Cornell are getting opportunities that they would have never got before. Even players like Kyle Norris and Derek Jones are seeing reps in our defense. Jake Thomas has been a contributing member. And the funny thing about it? It's working. Is this going to give pause to the line of thinking that Canadians are not viable solutions in certain areas of the lineup? If this keeps up, is the league going to use the Winnipeg franchise as a model to support the idea that maybe our (the league, not Winnipeg) Canadian talent is not as weak as some suggest? And maybe all these guys need are a chance to prove it? Will we see more undrafted players getting the opportunity to show what they've got for meaningful offensive or defensive reps? Whatever it is, I love it. How can you not cheer for these guys.

Tyron Brackenridge might tell you otherwise.

But the point is they haven't allowed a lot.

Will Ford had one good game behind a very strong OL against a piss poor D. Good for him. Not calling it a mistake to cut him.

"Argos have no depth"

FREE COTTON

why on earth would you consider trading January for draft picks? We literally have nobody to replace him at the moment.

Anyone wanna take a stab at a 1000 word essay about why we should trade Rene Stephan for Josh Bourke?

Cave has been cut, replaced by Hunter Steward.

How the hell did he manage to write so much about a trade proposal that makes no sense

That fake is a ridiculous call. Nobody is expecting it because it's quite literally the dumbest thing you could possibly do. Singlehandedly cost them the game.

Winnipeg 81 (to honor Geroy) BC 4.5

I guess if you don't like context, it discredits my point. Numbers are just numbers without context. The context of Grigsby's numbers in week 4 is that 37 of his 100 came on plays that Edmonton basically handed to him because they were in prevent defense in the final 25 seconds of a half. So 63 yards. If you want to go further in depth, let's look at what he did with his carries. On first down, he had carries of 4, 3, 6, 7, 1, 1, 4 ... that's 7 first down carries and he's averaging 3.4 yards a carry. He didn't have a single carry over 13 yards. On top of that, if you REALLY want to get technical about it, 11 of his receiving yards were on a play where the blocker actually got called for holding, but there were 23 seconds left in the game and Edmonton just declined the penalty. So there you have it. 100 yards, 3.4 yards a carry on first down and 48 of his 50 receiving yards were gifted to us by Edmonton by prevent defense or declined penalties because they couldn't be bothered - on top of all of that, he was also targeted 11 times as a receiver, hauled in only 5 and his mental error on one of them cost us more points than we scored all game. So yeah. Keep telling me how his performance is not trending downward. MB called two running plays in the first half against Ottawa - Grigsby got his 60 yards in one half Montreal was completely loading the box - Grigsby had a blocking role for most of that game... MB completely abandoned the running game halfway through the 3rd quarter Willy was throwing like crap in the Edm game plus a few of the throws that Grigsby 'missed' were Willy avoiding a sack - Grigsby might be our only guy who made catches that game - everyone was off Your memory is failing you. Grigsby had 6 carries (23 yards) in the first half of that game. 8 in the second.

I guess if you don't like context, it discredits my point. Numbers are just numbers without context. The context of Grigsby's numbers in week 4 is that 37 of his 100 came on plays that Edmonton basically handed to him because they were in prevent defense in the final 25 seconds of a half. So 63 yards. If you want to go further in depth, let's look at what he did with his carries. On first down, he had carries of 4, 3, 6, 7, 1, 1, 4 ... that's 7 first down carries and he's averaging 3.4 yards a carry. He didn't have a single carry over 13 yards. On top of that, if you REALLY want to get technical about it, 11 of his receiving yards were on a play where the blocker actually got called for holding, but there were 23 seconds left in the game and Edmonton just declined the penalty. So there you have it. 100 yards, 3.4 yards a carry on first down and 48 of his 50 receiving yards were gifted to us by Edmonton by prevent defense or declined penalties because they couldn't be bothered - on top of all of that, he was also targeted 11 times as a receiver, hauled in only 5 and his mental error on one of them cost us more points than we scored all game. So yeah. Keep telling me how his performance is not trending downward. Did you factor level of competition into your analysis? I'm sure you'd agree that a better defense (e.g. Edmonton & Montreal vs Ottawa & Toronto) would impact on a running backs average yards per carry and not necessarily mean the player is regressing. I could, but that still doesn't help his case - if you can only put up good numbers against bad teams, that's not a ringing endorsement either. But let's see how other backs did against Edmonton Andrew Harris - 139 yards, 1 TD CJ Gable - 96 yards, 2 TD Chevon Walker - 94 yards, 1 TD Not a lot of garbage yards to be found in their performances either. Numbers aside, I just don't like what I see out of Grigsby when I watch him play. I watch him run hesitantly, he's ducking his pad level way too early in an effort to try and fake out defenders in the open field and he just doesn't seem to have the best hands in the world out of the backfield. He has positives - his ball security is a major plus and unlike some, I don't think he's particularly prone to going down on first contact (although he was during the Edmonton game) - but I just liked the way Cotton runs a lot better.

I guess if you don't like context, it discredits my point. Numbers are just numbers without context. The context of Grigsby's numbers in week 4 is that 37 of his 100 came on plays that Edmonton basically handed to him because they were in prevent defense in the final 25 seconds of a half. So 63 yards. If you want to go further in depth, let's look at what he did with his carries. On first down, he had carries of 4, 3, 6, 7, 1, 1, 4 ... that's 7 first down carries and he's averaging 3.4 yards a carry. He didn't have a single carry over 13 yards. On top of that, if you REALLY want to get technical about it, 11 of his receiving yards were on a play where the blocker actually got called for holding, but there were 23 seconds left in the game and Edmonton just declined the penalty. So there you have it. 100 yards, 3.4 yards a carry on first down and 48 of his 50 receiving yards were gifted to us by Edmonton by prevent defense or declined penalties because they couldn't be bothered - on top of all of that, he was also targeted 11 times as a receiver, hauled in only 5 and his mental error on one of them cost us more points than we scored all game. So yeah. Keep telling me how his performance is not trending downward.

Pretty strange post for a guy who usually calls out other posters for selective stats... Willy Week 1 - 308 yds (70%) Week 2 - 307 yds (64%) Week 3 - 256 yds (63%) Week 4 - 180 yds (52%) Look! He's trending downwards too... we should try Brohm. Greaves injury against Ottawa is the main factor in all of this... that and maybe MB is the one who is trending downwards... we'll see this week. Except I'm not talking about Willy.

Grigsby through the first 3 games Week 1 - 139 yards Week 2 - 112 yards Week 3 - 59 yards He's trending downward and this is a guy that was supposed to be needing the early games to shake the rust off. His week 4 numbers against Edmonton are back up to exactly 100 but nearly a third of those came on one play against prevent defense to end a half. He's not that good. He's not bad, but Cotton was advertised as better and I for one would like to see.

Why? I'm guessing because he thinks Cotton is better.