Mike
-
Posts
9,423 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
39
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Mike
-
-
Just a prediction, but I really think Kenny Tate is a rookie that cracks our starting lineup this year. He's exactly the type of player Etch likes.
-
Interesting decisions ... I don't see how much of it makes sense though.
-- 4 non imports on the offensive line and you still want to gamble with a rookie safety that we drafted as a linebacker? Even if you did want a non-import safety, why not Newman?
-- Hard to believe we wouldn't start Kohlert.
-- You're missing a designated import.
-
Anyone else concerned that Goossen has not actually played Canadian football for, um, ever? I think he's a nice talent but I just don't see how he will emerge as our starting centre after TC... in fact, I'm a bit worried we'll ruin him if he does.
As a center? Not really.
-
-
Alright so like ... let's try to keep it on track and stuff in here. Locking it is in the cards if the conversation keeps devolving.
-
not to mention, ottawa took a couple guys there in the draft who made you go hmm.
I mean they took a guy who had to quit football cuz of concusions.
That right there makes you wonder.
It was a brilliant pick.
-
I think we go with 4 import DB's, 2 import OL, DI's are kicker, returner/RB/receiver, DE/LB hybrid type guy that Etch loves.
If they feel like Neufeld can start, that import spot goes to the secondary.
Four designated imports now.
Also, if we have two import OL, where's the other Canuck?
-
Agree, disagree, I moved Washington to safety on my depth chart at one point throughout the off-season.
Randle - Sears - Washington - Suber - Canadian
Just as easy to put Sears at safety too. Options.
It makes sense, then you use one of your new imports (Leggett, Johnson, whoever) as the DI and you're set.
Sears or Washington at safety, either one is a great option.
-
-
-
Newman reminds me a lot of Antoine Pruneau, to be honest. He'll line up all over the place.
-
I still think there's a chance we start a NI at safety and field corner.
It would be a dangerous move to handcuff ourselves like that, to be honest. You very well may be right, but that's a lot of snaps you're handing to unproven guys in order to keep one of Randle, Washington or Sears off the field. Even a guy like Leggett or Bruce Johnson could make it difficult. The team just seems to have invested into way too many import defensive backs to be anticipating a situation where we play two Canadians in the secondary.
-
QB - Willy, Hall, 3rd QB
RB - Import RB, Volny*
FB - Pontbriand*, Fitzgerald*
REC - Moore, Denmark, Watson*, Kohlert*, Import REC, Feoli-Gudino*, Brescacin*
OL - January, Greaves*, Goossen*, Pencer*, Neufeld*, Morley*
DL - Vega, Turner, Anderson, Import DE, Lucas*, Thomas*
LB - Kuale, Wild, Banks, Newman*, Briggs*, Stephan*
DB - Sears, Washington, Suber, Randle, Import DB, Robertson*, Alexander*, Bucknor*, Jones*, Sherman*
K - Maher
Leaving 1 spot for a DI at either returner/RB or LB.
There are upgrades needed in certain places, like I'd really love to see an improvement on the NI receiving depth but I think it's interesting that the roster is at least starting to come together. I lumped in all the secondary guys together because I have no idea who will play where as far as safety, etc.
Wild, Kuale and Banks as our "starters"?
I guess it may be written that way on the depth chart. Newman is going to take a lot of snaps all over the place though. I basically envision Newman, Alexander and a defensive lineman rotating as the Canadian in our defense. Alexander will be the starter on the depth chart at field corner, but when Newman is in, we could have an import defensive back pulling Alexander out.
-
So you don't see Jarvis Jones on the roster? When I asked O'Shea a while back he said we'd have 2 imports on the OL. He didn't think we were ready to start 4 NI OLs.
So with losing Henoc then what do we do for NI starting positions? 3 on the OL, we only have the depth to start 2 at WR/SB, and then safety....so....DL? Ted Laurent, please come here!!
Like I've been saying for months (and getting made fun of for it on here) Walters confirmed at last nights presser that the Bombers plan on starting a NI at field cornerback.
I think what you were getting knocked about was the thought that they'd start two Canadians in the secondary. Which I don't think they are going to. NI field corner and import safety.
-
Bombers turned down 5+12 for Goossen.
I'm actually glad they did. I'm not in love with the Goossen pick but I certainly would not have wanted 5+12. Coombs or Pruneau would've been my picks at 5 and neither one was there. Evan Gill or Quinn Smith would've been my targets at 12 and neither one was there, going off who WAS available, I'm sure that Briggs would've been the pick at 12 and we got him much later anyways.
That's not what you were saying yesterday. You were fully supportive of Bombers trading down to get more value from the draft.
I can project all I want but in hindsight, it was obviously a smart move to stay solid at 2 and that's why they're the professionals running the draft and I'm the guy posting on a website. I even posted yesterday I would've preferred something like 5+Haidara as opposed to 5+12 but the way the board fell, 5+12 would not have been very good for us. Mainly because I think our target at 12 would've likely been Briggs anyways. Look at the run on guys at 12-16. For our team needs, would you swap any one of them straight up for Briggs? I wouldn't.
The 5+12 deal just would've ended up being a mistake with the way the board fell.
-
QB - Willy, Hall, 3rd QB
RB - Import RB, Volny*
FB - Pontbriand*, Fitzgerald*
REC - Moore, Denmark, Watson*, Kohlert*, Import REC, Feoli-Gudino*, Brescacin*
OL - January, Greaves*, Goossen*, Pencer*, Neufeld*, Morley*
DL - Vega, Turner, Anderson, Import DE, Lucas*, Thomas*
LB - Kuale, Wild, Banks, Newman*, Briggs*, Stephan*
DB - Sears, Washington, Suber, Randle, Import DB, Robertson*, Alexander*, Bucknor*, Jones*, Sherman*
K - Maher
Leaving 1 spot for a DI at either returner/RB or LB.
There are upgrades needed in certain places, like I'd really love to see an improvement on the NI receiving depth but I think it's interesting that the roster is at least starting to come together. I lumped in all the secondary guys together because I have no idea who will play where as far as safety, etc.
-
Winners and losers...
Great
Calgary - Lavertu, Smith and Caron - just keep getting stronger... plus LDT and Thibault gambles
Sask - traded out of first round and still ended up with Ainsworth and Bastien, loaded up on OL late
BC - Glenn, Player, Chin - filled some holes for sure
Good
Winnipeg - Safe draft with Goossen and Briggs, waiting on Neufeld now
Toronto - Nice move to get Coombs
Hamilton - Some nice talent, still targetting LBs and DL
Bad
Ottawa - Did they have Mack on the phone?
Edmonton - Another Cdn receiver??? Trying to see a plan here...
I guess I don't necessarily see it the same way as you ...
Calgary A+
They knocked this one out of the park, nearly every pick they made was perfect. They legitimately got three players that were talented enough to go first overall, drafting Caron and Thibault could pay huge dividends as well. Fantastic work by Hufnagel.
Toronto B+
Value value value. Coombs in the first round is a home run swing, need to see if it clears the yard still but every other pick was great value. Dupuis, Black, Fletcher and Corrado late in the night is just excellent use of resources and their project was an OL pick (Dhillon) unlike a lot of teams that went for projects in strange positions
Winnipeg B
Strong use of the picks they had, assertive in working the draft board to get what they want. Goossen not the popular pick in my eyes, but the need was there. Briggs and Jones in the spots they fell to are great value, they are both top 15 picks in a draft where everyone goes best player available. Everett is a project where your projects should be (OL) and meh, the worst thing I can say is I don't like their 7th rounder. Oh well.
BC B-
The only reason this is a B- and not a B is because while I understand the purpose, I don't like the value of pure fullbacks that early. Chin is a good pick and while I don't like Menard, he's a strong pick at that point in the draft. BC is one of those teams that you can tell they adjusted as the draft went on, which is not something you can say about every other team.
Saskatchewan B-
I like what they did for the future, but it's hard to give them a very strong grade because I look down their draft board and don't see anything in terms of projectable starters. I see projects and I see special teamers. Not necessarily a bad thing, but I don't think they can say they improved anything but their backend depth today.
Montreal C
Montreal did what they always do, which is follow their board and never stray from it. They stayed true to form even as guys with better potential value fell to the picks around them. Montreal never seeks value, they just go down their own personal list without the Finley in the 3rd is baffling, Andrew Smith in the 4th is also "interesting" but I do like what they did with their early picks. Lue and Foucault are strong, everything else is somewhat confusing.
Hamilton C-
Hard to judge their body of work since they really didn't have much to work with. Aside from him being a Manitoba boy, Evan Gill is a risky pick for a team like Hamilton because he's one of your two top 40 picks and he may not even consider coming to camp this year as he gears up for the NFL next year. Moving up to get Landry confused me for the price they paid and the other guys are wait and see types. I do like Pesek though.
Ottawa D
Can't get on board with this. I like Pruneau, he'll be a starter for them this year and probably a deserving one at that. Almost every other pick is a head scratcher, not because of what positions they took but because of who they filled them with. One pick that I really think is brilliant was Hugo Desmarais. He quit football two years ago because of concussion issues, but if he ever decides to try a comeback, he was considered a surefire first rounder when healthy. But potential brilliance in the fifth round when you bomb almost everything else doesn't get you a good grade in my books.
Edmonton F
The one pick I like is Raye Hartmann, he was ranked slightly above Derek Jones on my board but everything else is just baffling to me, especially the trade they made. Trading out of the top three to draft another guy at your ONLY position of strength and then using the additional pick you acquire in the second round to go WAY off the board and pick a guy pretty much everyone else had outside of the top 30-35 picks is just plain bad.
-
Bombers turned down 5+12 for Goossen.
I'm actually glad they did. I'm not in love with the Goossen pick but I certainly would not have wanted 5+12. Coombs or Pruneau would've been my picks at 5 and neither one was there. Evan Gill or Quinn Smith would've been my targets at 12 and neither one was there, going off who WAS available, I'm sure that Briggs would've been the pick at 12 and we got him much later anyways.
-
-
-
-
I'm going on record and predicting Calgary moved up to leapfrog Montreal. I think it's for Pruneau.
Great move if it is. They have Hecht/MacDougall right now, and I'm not sure either is capable.
It just makes sense. Like I said on Twitter I don't think 1 was the goal, I think they dealt to get ahead of Montreal AND BC, which they did.
Why would they deal a guard to draft a center to move their center to guard?
-
I'm going on record and predicting Calgary moved up to leapfrog Montreal. I think it's for Pruneau.
-
it cant just be straight up with no pick coming back to ottawa, that would be ridiculous.
It is.
Best guess at the 44 man roster projection
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
DE