GCn20

I think part of the reason he wasn't used as much last year was for the reasons you have outlined. However, I would expect his run stop would be improved as a 2nd year guy. Rookies are raw, but having a full offseason and camp under his belt I would hope that has improved. That being said I like Garbutt's potential to go inside and out in our lineup. I would love to see both guys get meaningful reps this year.

Just took a quick peek around the league at whose rosters rival ours. I'm not seeing any. A couple that are not too far off, but we are looking real good again.

We don't know one way or another, but what we do know is that Grant was not considered a priority. Would we have liked to have him back? Who knows. There were rumblings long before Walters was blowing the cash to re-sign guys that Grant was going to have to wait to see if there was money left for him though.

I am of the thinking that if we go with a 7 man rotation I don't really care who they pick out of Haba/Garbutt/Rivers. Mostly because I have no idea who is looking the best at camp right now.

Meh....90% of those cover teams won't be on our roster.

Edmonton has a qb now.

Lots of ppl thinking the Riders improved and for the life of me I just can't see how.

6 of those 9 don't start on any other CFL team and 2 of those 3 that qualify as starters are lower end starters.

I'm hoping this is the year we bring in a real difference maker rookie to our DL. Don't care if it is inside or out.

I see zero improvement on their defence, in fact, it looks weaker to me. That was their achilles last year and will be again....and does anyone think that a faberge egg 40 year old QB survives the season?

BC has to find balance in it's offence. Passing numbers are fine and good but come November it leaves you with a 3 spot on the scoreboard.

Why would we? The Strev is back in town. Only way that Prukop is a Bomber this year is if ZC or Strev went down.

Case, if he is willing, will almost certainly be brought back for the PR imo. I thought RIvers showed a great motor when he was in the game. That, and the stuff you mentioned are all part of the equation for sure.

I am not sold on VA having a repeat of his success last season.

Hope so. Career life expectancy of many of our position groups is kind of forcing the issue a bit.

I'm not sure on Calgary, as I have not been looking at their roster all that much, but I agree with you on Saskatchewan.

?? What improvements have they made? Do tell. In order to improve a team must recognize where it's problems are and I see nothing that would lead me to believe they have improved their weaknesses other than coaching.

I thought Rivers looked good in the game.

No surprise there either. Wasn't a particularly good RB.

Hamilton's dline looks great on paper, but seriously underachieved last season. Sometimes there is a fine line between a healthy rotation and guys just not able to get into the groove because they are not getting enough reps. It's a balancing act.

Yea..it's not like their Eastern counterparts are juggernauts.

There certainly are very few teams that have more than half a dozen real quality NAT starters followed by a few capable rotational NATs and the rest are at best career teamers. The NFL has hit NAT availability hard.

Rookies for the most part aren't ready to push out a vet by the end of camp and we don't dress shlub starters at any position. A rookie would have to be a game breaker to push out a vet on our team while they are still at the beginning of the learning curve. Very few rookies league wide show that ability year one.

I agree. I can't think of a single instance where we cut a game breaking receiver in order to keep a shlub. If someone in camp steps up they will be kept, if they deserve touches they will get them. I get what these guys are criticizing but stuff like that is over the top.

I expect roster controversy to remain a hot topic here for a while. MOS builds his roster to reinforce the culture, and doesn't have the luxury of black and white thinking like a fan does.