TBURGESS

It's completely unprofessional to fire anyone via text. Face to face is best, but if Foley can't make it to the club's offices, then over the phone would be OK.

I also liked Malcolm Carter in the one on one's. Not at 6, but as a later/developmental pick. Didn't think the Herdman's looked very good. I thought Gosselin and Alexander stood out in a good way as well as Woodson and Wright.

A great group of players. Congrats to all of them.

I don't think it's a cap space issue as much as it's a 'We've already spent as much as budgeted on the DL'. Having 2 first round picks will cost a bunch too.

Length of a contract when the player can be cut at any time doesn't mean that much. If his play goes down, you cut him. If his play remains stable you keep him. If he gets better, you extend him with more money.

Two guys, neither of whom know the details are arguing over how much Hurl is making? Welcome to the offseason.

I'm passing judgement on his past play, not on his future. According to CFL.CA, he played in 17 games over 2 years (Almost half the games) recording a single catch. He's the #3 NI receiver for a reason. That's not an excuse for limited playing time. It's a decision made by the coaching staff. 'He didn't look horrible' is hardly an endorsement. He didn't have to beat any top NI receivers (Kohlert was #55 in the league in receiving yards last year and JFG was #73) to move up the chart, but he couldn't move past either of them. It will be interesting to see if Richard can even move past Coates in TC. Can you explain how any of that suggests that Richards is anything other than a failure at this point in his CFL career?

Liking or not liking a pick has nothing to do with it. Even if I'd liked the pick, I'd say that Richards been a failure so far because that's what the measurable's say. If he does have success, I'll call it a success because that's what the stats will say. I'm not ignoring his injuries. According to CFL.CA, he's played 17 games over 2 years, which is almost a full season. He's only caught 1 ball because there are a couple of better NI receivers ahead of him on the depth chart, and neither of them are very good. Neither of us are going to change the other's mind, so lets agree to disagree and move on.

Snap judgement for a guy going into his 3rd year? Nope. It's called judging him based on his time with the Bombers. Folks around here want to completely ignore his first 2 years. For some unknown reason his 3rd year is the only one that matters. BTW, I don't follow hockey, so I don't know the references Brett's making, but I know enough to know that the NFL draft is nothing like the CFL draft.

I thought he was a poor draft pick at the time and I said as much. That doesn't mean I didn't have patience with him for the first two years and it doesn't mean I wanted him to fail, but fail he did. You love the 'what if's', so what if he gets cut after TC or during the season or after the season, will you cast judgement then? Will you say he was a failure or a bad pick?

No, it's not rocket science. He is a bad pick because there were better and higher ranked choices on the board and because he hasn't contributed in 2 years. He'll move out of the failure range if he can magically become something he's never been in the CFL before... a contributing member of our team. He'll become a good pick if he becomes better than the alternatives of Waud and/or Durant.

It's not about what he might or might not do in the future, it's about his entire career so far. If he does well this year or in the future, you can move him out of the failure column. It's pretty evident, based on the facts and the stats, that Richards has been a failure and the 'give him a participation ribbon' folks don't want to say it, which is fine, but they also don't want anyone else to say it, which causes the arguments. I had patience in his first and second seasons. I'd give him TC to prove that he belongs. If he can't then my patience has run out and I'd like to see someone else get the shot.

Fair enough. I was just wondering why.

Why will this make Nichols happy? Miller's a special teams guy. He's played 6 years and has zero carries, zero catches.

There's lots of justification to say he's a bad pick. There were at least 2 much better players who were ranked higher available when we picked him. He's only caught 1 ball in two years. There is no justifiable reason to say that he's a great, good or average pick yet. That leaves bad IMO. Suggesting that he may become good in the future doesn't change the fact that he's done squat in two full years and he's way more likely to be the next Etienne than the next Claremont. In fact, Jade had better stats in his first 2 years then got cut in TC in his 3rd year. Absolutely no one is complaining that Richards is not a star yet. They are complaining that he hasn't moved past 3rd string NI receiver in two years. Some folks think it's because he hasn't been given a chance, but there aren't any participation ribbons in the pros... You have to earn your playing time. If he wasn't one of our high draft picks he'd already be gone. How much patience are you expecting? I don't see anyone suggesting we cut him before TC. I see lots of suggestions that it's his make or break year and that we bring in competition for him. Sounds reasonable considering his output so far.

He's had 2 years to prove that he deserves an opportunity. When he got one, he didn't have any success. BTW I'm in Calgary these days and simply posting as much as I do around here while not posting at all on any other teams sites proves I'm a Bomber fan.

Neufeld was the starter until he got injured (again). Bond's both better and cheaper. Without Bond, we don't win as many games as we did last year. JFG has to be penciled in as a starter this year. The other candidates are Richards and Coates. All of our import receivers are better than them. Hurl mostly played special teams last year and took some reps on D. That's the same as Bass and Bennett. I don't think it's going out on a limb to say that Hurl made more money than either of them. If we reduced the number of starting NI's, we would replace the worst one with an import. That's why I chose the players I chose. They are likely the worst NI's who get starting time. BTW: Muamba isn't that great and Greenwood is still looking for a job because a LB with concussion problems isn't going to get a lot of chances.

Nice try... I also defined a bunch of different things in the grey area and he's none of them. I haven't seen a single example of any success that Richards has had in the CFL. As it stands Jade freakn' Etienne had more success in the CFL.

Lets try this another way... Neufeld or Bond (at way less money BTW)? JFG over any of our import receivers? Hurl over Bass/Bennett? Personally, I'll take the better players. 1 more thing... Folks seem to have taken reducing the NI ratio by 1 or even 2 players to mean getting rid of all the Canadian players in the league, which is never going to happen. We're talking about losing the two worst NI's on every team. Players that most fans couldn't even name.

Tons of grey area between success and failure, but you can't call him great or good or above average or average or slightly below average yet. That leaves failure IMO. What else is there?

Because a certain number of NI's are mandated for every team and the number of NI's who can actually play at a starters level is less than the number who are mandated, those NI's are paid big bucks, well over the 100K mark. The going rate for a top draft pick, who hasn't showed that they can even play in the CFL is over $100K. Backup NI's are getting more than $100K simply as insurance. The savings for backup imports vs backup NI's would be pretty significant or the backup NI's would have to take a pay cut to compete. No, 100K isn't going to change a high profile athletes mind to come to Canada, but it's not about competing for players with the NFL. We all know that the CFL can't do that. It's about bringing in better players for less than their current NI counterparts are getting and that's what most top end US s college players are. I think there are a lot of US players who'd love to continue their playing days.

You're right. The cap wouldn't likely change so the SMS would remain the same. What we would end up with is better players for the same money.

Folks admit that Richards hasn't had any success what so ever in 2 years, but still say you can't call him a failure? What would you call him? Great? Nope. Good? Nope. Average? Nope. Below Average? Sure, as long as you add Way before the below. Will he be a failure this year? That remains to be seen. Has he been a failure so far? U bet.

Reducing the number of NI's by one or two a team wouldn't do anything to hurt the development of NI's. The best NI's get an NFL shot anyway, Most college ball players, NI or not, will never make either the CFL or the NFL. That doesn't stop them from playing at university or college or juniors. Reducing the number of NI's doesn't mean changing the CFL rules to match the NFL or losing the Canadian identity of the league. It just means less guaranteed jobs for NI's. Teams could always choose to carry more NI's if the NI players are as good and as cheap as the imports they replace. There's no such thing as a hundred years of the same number of NI's. The number of NI's has changed before and it will likely change again. The rules change almost yearly these days and it's the rules that make the CFL special. Changing the ratio would make running a CFL team less expensive and would allow us to watch better players playing our game.

1 catch in 2 years is failure. I don't see how anyone can say he's succeeded in his CFL career. Richards is under contract. He'll get one more chance with the Bombers in TC this year. Assuming we draft a receiver, he'll be in competition for the last NI receiver spot. With 2 years of experience, he'd better win it, or else he'll find himself looking for a new job.