GCn20

I would imagine that would apply to his recruitment going forward. At the moment the Ticats have two starters under 6 feet so they won't be getting a ton bigger in their starters. Might see Hervey going through the backups and teamers to get bigger though. That's great news. Takes a team out of play on the Dru Brown front.

I do not blame any coach or player for jumping to the NFL if they get the chance. I'm not sure fawning over it in public is the right play, but RD would be a lot more financially successful in the NFL.

Yea, I was hoping Milanovich would stay in the hunt for Riders HC, but it appears he withdrew once the TIcats made him the same offer.

I agree. Oakman had a great season a few years ago and has been a loose cannon ever since.

Having 3 gimped receivers doesn't force Collaros to do anything. He could have seen the over/under coverage and decided to simply tuck and run to preserve the FG, or he could have looked to another receiver (Demski) that was wide open on the play or maybe our OC could have trusted our RB from 1st and goal at the 8. Convenient you failed to mention the impact of roster management on the Brady fumble that could have sealed the game. Having 3 guys in the secondary moving around absolutely does not automatically equate to a bust in coverage. Neither are certainties, and both are mental mistakes by the players on the field that were 100% avoidable and certainly not inevitable. Basically yea. We got nicked up at the wrong time of year and did not play with the mental focus we needed to play with.

How many times did teams score against us comparatively. Teams are going to make plays against you. It is 100% unrealistic to expect otherwise and really is a red herring to point that out. Play calls and game plans are calculated risks that you can make enough plays to keep the opposition from scoring more than your team will score. The Bombers were very, very good at that. That is just straight up fact. It is myopic to look at one aspect of a defence without putting the net result game to game, and over the year, into the equation. Our defence was rock solid all year and was a top 2 defence in this league....and no it does not matter one iota how exactly we got there. The result is irrefutable. We do a lot of things on DL to aid our Lbers, and secondary that takes away from the pass rush. Our main goal with our DL is to disrupt the play, we have heard this ad nauseum over several years. Pass rush is just one way a DL does that.

Sure they do, and so does everyone else's pass rush stats. Does it really matter how you do it? Agreed. He makes plays but also costs his team as well.

Riders haven't won anything since 2013..and has been a complete gong show for two years now. We are not same right now.

It may have, but that's purely speculation. You say the blown coverages wouldn't have happened with Rose on the field. That might be true or might not be. That is opinion and speculation. I also give the blown coverages a big part of the blame but certainly don't weigh them evenly with the turnovers as we could have still kept points off the board on all but one.

Oops you are right. My bad. Must be PTSD

Evan Holm was in our camp in 2022. That turned out pretty nicely. I would say that was pretty nicely developed. I'll wait and see on Givhan. McGhee and McKnight were busts for sure and were gap fillers on the PR. Sometimes, you gotta sign what's available too though. The XFL/USFL has taken a lot of our real good PR guys off the table. We finished 2nd in the CFL in QB pressures, and 2nd in sacks last year despite have the 2nd fewest defensive plays in the league. Not saying anything you stated is incorrect, just that we did pretty darn good with what we had. If we can get better than that....right on. Oakman has work ethic issues that got him sat down to a rotational piece for most of the season. I would stay clear. Kongbo would be a very good addition.

A team severely handicaps it's chances to win when they turn the ball over 3 times in the red zone against a red hot defense. We can talk about roster usage, or play calling and it is opinion whether it would make a difference in winning or losing. What isn't opinion is what we absolutely know took points off the board (turnovers deep in the red zone) and what gave Montreal points ( blown coverages extending drives). This was a tightly contested game that came down to 4-5 plays of which we were on the wrong end of all of them. Whether we agree with roster usage or not, the team we fielded would have won that game if we play clean ball. We didn't. Some here want to blame the entire loss on coaching mistakes, and that is just tunnel vision on their part. Was it a factor? For sure. A big factor? Not nearly as big as they are claiming.

What makes me laugh about guys like MIke is that they think talent can't make mistakes. One is not exclusive of the other. Also, I think I've been very consistently saying that I thought Buck and Hall called a horrible game and the non usage of BOOL and McCrae was a mistake. There was literally only one way the Bombers could lose the Grey Cup and that was by making mistakes and they did. We were the more talented team, I don't think that's even up for debate, and we gave the game away.

One benefit of not adding late in the season, we had some extra cash to spend. Figured Willie would be the first domino. He was probably camping outside Walter's door when he was signing his contract handing him his new one to sign. Dude loves it here.

We still didn't need to activate Roosevelt. Had better options.

Can't run? I saw them all running. There is no doubt that Bailey/Demski/Schoen were not 100% but they weren't out there on crutches either. Yea some of the their routes had to be ditched, but let's not exaggerate they were in the game at 80%. I am not sure that Ambles at 100% is better than any of those 3 at 80%. Would it have been different if all 3 were 100%? For sure it would have been and it sucks that we had injuries at that time. However. we still managed to move the ball quite well. We just didn't finish at all. Nor should he have. Ok...fair enough. Who would you have liked to see Roosevelt replace and explain how that would have been A1 roster usage. There was literally no opportunity for Roosevelt to play at all. Our receivers were healthy all year and BOLO needed playing time.

Sacks are a red herring stat in isolation. Willie J ranked 3rd in all DEs in pressures, first in pass knock downs, and is a disruptor still. Coach Hall's system isn't one that is conducive to DEs racking up sack totals. Willie is a special talent that we use differently than most DEs around the league. Hell we drop him into coverage sometimes. I'm all for Haba getting more play time when he learns how to close off run lanes more consistently.

BOOL may leave for a starting role, but only IF he can find one. I think it says that the Bombers feel that Demski and Woli are better than him. Ambles signed a PR deal after no one in the league wanted him. I think he was pretty darn aware of his situation.

Awesome job Chevy. Fair term/Fair price.

Ambles was purely an emergency guy IF we couldn't dress Schoen/Bailey/Demski, and Alston looked completely lost out there in his start. He just didn't know our system well enough yet. That's not to say that he won't be a good receiver but he looked pretty terrible in his play time he did get. Super struggled with the waggle. I went back and watched Ambles last couple games in TO, and he was god awful and looked like he lost a couple steps. However, McCrae and BOLO both looked like contributors this year and had carnal knowledge of our playbook. I just don't understand not using them. I know a lot of ppl here are not huge McCrae as a receiver fans, but he really did have an impact game against Montreal already this year. Even Grant, could have seen some more spot duty in the offence. We didn't run a single sweep except to Demski. McCrae and Grant running a few sweeps would have made a lot more sense.

IF O'Day had half a noodle for a brain, he would turf Harris and his anchor of a 525k contract. Sign Brown for 300-350k, use the saving to actually have an OL and give his new QB a chance of success. We know it won't happen, but that is the smart play over keeping Harris, having a crap OL again, and wondering what went wrong. If we are running it back with Collaros when he is 38 and clearly shot I hope our GM is fired. Just saying. Not a double standard just because it is the Riders. I think Zac has a couple really good years left in the tank but even now we need to be doing all we can to make sure we have his replacement ready to go in 2026 or sooner IF the wheels fall off before that. We are likely entering rebuild right around that time too.

There are young guys on the market this year. Instead they are running it back with a 40 year old QB coming off a very serious knee injury that has already shown tendencies of being extremely gun shy over the past few years. If they were contending I could see the risk taking with Harris, but they are so very clearly in a complete tear down and rebuild why on earth bring back the 525k QB who is more than likely done. When they signed Harris last year most of this forum suggested it was a high risk move. However, they were the ugly girl at closing time and there really was nothing on the market. This year they have a chance to get a QB of the future and are running it back. My objection isn't so much to re-signing Harris as it is to where they are at as a franchise and re-signing Harris. Makes no sense to me. The guy offers absolutely nothing beyond this year, and has a very high probability that even this year is a bust.

Sorry, I am not buying into Ambles/Alston over Schoen/Demski. We had McCrae and BOLO sitting there in the wings and that is more than reasonable depth. We just didn't use it.

What guys should have been replaced by PR guys in your opinion. I have absolutely no issue with our recruitment, or letting guys ripen on the vine. If you had it your way Holm would have been cut in TC. Now look. Some guys need development time and I have no issue with that and don't see that as either a recruitment or roster management failure. Where have we stopped turning over stones? We continually find great rookies in the past few years. Sorry, I am not seeing that. I think we have had good success with our PR development. Now, what positions we choose to keep on the PR, that's worth discussing for sure.

Yea. no one has 3 starting calibre receivers waiting to go late in the season. That's not a realistic expectation. However, we did dress 2 capable guys and never used them. McCrae was fine and so was BOLO and yes Buck failed by not using them. Not buying in on Ambles or Alston though. Not sure they were any better than any of the guys nicked up.