mbrg

Anderson will see lots of snaps if he makes the team. He should, I just won't assume anything at this point. Lucas and Newman were going to be big parts of the 7th NI rotation. Now we'll have to wait and see if the guys behind them on the depth chart will be as effective. I have liked almost everything I've seen from Bucknor so far. I don't pay attention to other teams lunchpail guys so he has been a very pleasant surprise to me. Maybe others knew he was this good when he came over from Hamilton. The Bombers are choosing to give Willy the best possible offence to work with right now. By game 2 they might feel confident enough in him or Goossen to start 4 NI's on the Oline. If and when it happens, Anderson will get back the title as starter and the 45 snaps per game that comes with it. Until then he's probably going to see 30 snaps per game. There has always been a rotation on the Dline; Thomas was seeing some of Anderson's snaps last year. Any issues with defending the run will have more to do with scheme than personnel. And the fact that we've assemble personnel specifically for this scheme. But mostly scheme. We didn't have a nose tackle on the roster last year and we did alright against the run.

I am reading what you're typing. I'm trying to connect the dots to where it makes us better. So you are suggesting that we have a game day roster that features only 2 running backs (Cotton/Messam) and use the DI elsewhere? Please correct this if I'm still not understanding you. I will then explain why that doesn't really make us better.

I haven't watched the play over and over, but on the replay it looked like the tackle got confused as to which man he should take, hesitated before moving back, and by then it was too late. It did not look like the left side was facing a numbers issue. It did look like a play where the tackle should at least have gotten a chip on the blitzer but he didn't. I'll take your word for it that it was Peterson. Hall shouldn't make plays assuming his teammates are incompetent, you make them assuming others will do their jobs. And then he got blown up good. Real good. You described the play pretty well how it happened regarding the tackle #51. A simple chip and that int. doesn't happen. Exactly right regarding Hall…he's got to assume the play, as called, is going to work as drawn up. I had no idea who was playing left tackle on that play. The only thought I had watching the replay was "I hope that wasn't Neufeld" cause whomever was out there looked terrible on that play.

I'm not crazy about Aaron Kelly but really all we need from that WR spot is a guy who can catch a few balls per game, and Kelly fits that persona. Denmark, Moore, and Watson will be the guys carrying the offence in terms of receivers.... that WR spot just needs to be a guy who can catch the damn ball when it comes to him. Kelly's not a gamebreaker but he makes tough catches to keep drives alive and that might be enough. It does seem odd with all the talk about our scouting staff that they haven't been able to bring in anyone better, though. What he has done best so far is bringing down the ball on plays he has little business making. Unless Urrutia steps up the job should be Kelly's. He is earning it this year. Usually the guy we have on the wide side is a NI we're stuffing over there in hopes of meeting the ratio and not hurting the team. Kelly on the wide side is actually a threat.

He's one highly athletic dude. Since CJOB is tweeting it I won't throw in the mandatory scold about talking about trick plays. Also, the other team is very unlikely to not notice Bryant Turner if he's lined up in our backfield. Stopping him, that's a separate can of worms.

He started game 1 poorly, but looked good in the later part of the game. It was nice to see he could carry it over into the next game. Progress and improvement over the course of camp is a good sign. If a guy is okay but never improves beyond that no matter how many reps he gets, he will probably never be better than okay.

So how do you want to use him? Describe his place on the team, his role, what he will actually contribute. Be specific. Connect some dots and demonstrate how he will make this team better this year in real and practical ways. Example of being specific (that requires a fictional depth chart that some will argue about even though that is clearly not the point), if Cotton is our starting RB and Ford is our DI who will replace Cotton in games in the event of injury or rest or pee break - Messam is not as good a running back as Ford (I should probably use Grigsby so all the people who don't like Ford aren't wasting their time arguing a point that isn't the point, but I suspect the Bombers will keep Ford around over Grigsby so I will remain true to myself, jeez this is a really long aside). (I'll just underline everything not in parenthesis so it's semi-readable) So either the Bombers are going to use: - Cotton, Ford, Volny Or under your scenario: - Cotton, Messam, Volny There is no realistic scenario where the Bombers use: - Cotton, Messam, Ford And there is no practical reason for the Bombers to use: -Cotton, Ford, Messam as Messam has no reason to ever touch the ball in that scenario. Practical and specific examples provided. Please feel free to argue with some practical and specific examples as to why you think Messam improves this team. Messam being better than Volny as a RB has never been a point of debate. Only the complete lack of practical relevance that his superiority has is being argued.

Keep it coming JWJ, and thanks. Perhaps I'll give it a turn tomorrow.

What makes you think Marve will be the backup? Based on 1 series Week 1 with less than 5 minutes remaining? He didn't shine yesterday when he was in again with under 5 mins to go. How can you annoint someone so quickly with such little body of work? If Hall & Brohm are replaceable then I'd say Marve will be lucky to stick with the team. He hasn't moved up the depth chart & after yesterday I don't think he will this week either. Obviously, the coaches see something in Brohm they like. Not so much in Marve. Prediction: Marve will NOT be our backup qb. hmmmm iso, you're not reading again. Please re-read what I bolded.... see it above? Does it say, anywhere, #2? Does it say 'backup'? No, its says 'groom". As in practice roster, or 3rd string even. The backup job will be fought out by Hall/Brohm. As it stands (and as I said in another post) I doubt any QB will get cut ...... yet. And since you like reading things that aren't there, I shall expand a bit on that for you. Groom, as in Troy Kopp, TJ Rubley, Justin Goltz, Tee Martin, etc. etc. etc. - Marve is the FIRST one I've seen in a long time that is what I feel is worth the effort to groom. Are we good now? Sure, but you're describing Marve as some kind of rising star for some reason based on what he did on ONE series. You do realize that he may not even make the team, right? No iso i'm basing it on the way he impressed at the free agent camp in Florida and from members here who have been going to tc everyday and extolling his virtues. Then I saw a guy come into the game in the last two minutes and look like he's been there before. So I'll throw back at you what you did to me - why do you hate Marve? None of what Marve did in Florida involved reading CFL defences. Little of what Marve did in training camp practises involved reading CFL defences. Some of what Marve did in the pre-season games involved reading CFL defences. Have some patience. This will be his biggest hurdle because it's every QBs biggest hurdle. This kind of learning takes time, not pressure. The glimpses of talent he's shown so far are promising, but they're just glimpses.

Urrutia hasn't done much to earn a roster spot at this point other than be tall. Cutdowns are only 3 days away - at this point I'm keeping Dell on the roster ahead of him if that's a choice the numbers forces us to make. I think you hit the nail on the head with Urrutia. I don't think they're ready to give up on him just yet due to his size and speed. From what I've heard though he's performed well in TC practices. So what kind of weight does OShea give camp performances compared to game performances? Based on game performances Jaymar Johnson has to be the frontrunner of the rookie crew. And no one is talking much about Aaron Kelly despite him showing well in practises and games. Woods might still land a spot because of his return skills, although OShea will need to watch tapes from last year to see why some still rave about him - he hasn't done much this year. Kemp has shown flashes of talent and butterfingers. Now Dell is here. We typically keep 6 import receivers somewhere on the rosters. Denmark and Moore are obvious; I suspect Kelly and Johnson are staying around. Who gets those last 2 spots? Is being 6'6" and good in practise enough for Urrutia?

ehhhhhhhh I dunno. Any extra job security Stephan got from Newman's injury has now been removed. The team needs lots of these types of players during the year. Stephan is still competing with Eisho for a job. If Cornell is still a gamer and Briggs' injury is soon resolved, then the numbers will start to work against him. Or Eisho. Unlikely they cut both.

I see what you did there. Clever. Someone will require an explanation. Then we can all point and laugh. (not saying it won't be me)

The name does seem familiar. Did he also build my computer? Cornell seems like an easy James Green-type pickup. Could make our special teams much better than using some of our other NI backups. Now can he take any meaningful reps on D? Probably not, but I'll cross my fingers just the same. Urrutia hasn't done much to earn a roster spot at this point other than be tall. Cutdowns are only 3 days away - at this point I'm keeping Dell on the roster ahead of him if that's a choice the numbers forces us to make.

Brohm has more tools than Hall. He also spent a good portion of camp getting reviewed as the 5th best QB on the field behind all the others and Yantz. He seems to finally have found a groove over the last week. When he sailed that first pass in Calgary I was concerned we were about to see more of the same, but he settled quickly after that. I'd want to see more of the same from him over the next while before I'm convinced he's reached consistency, and it's still training camp for a few more days, so depth charts are still somewhat meaningless, but if he can continue to progress the Bombers will be a better team for it.

I haven't watched the play over and over, but on the replay it looked like the tackle got confused as to which man he should take, hesitated before moving back, and by then it was too late. It did not look like the left side was facing a numbers issue. It did look like a play where the tackle should at least have gotten a chip on the blitzer but he didn't. I'll take your word for it that it was Peterson. Hall shouldn't make plays assuming his teammates are incompetent, you make them assuming others will do their jobs. And then he got blown up good. Real good.

the receiver took his route outside, likely what was called for him to do, but Hall wasn't able to get the ball out to him and it went more inside. To me it looked like Hall didn't get the ball where he wanted to get it on account of the pressure getting to him as he was throwing. He misjudged how much time he was going to have to throw and the result was a ball that didn't get where he wanted it to go. It was a risky decision at that point in the game. That happens when you're down by a bunch or early enough in the game it's not such a big deal, but the time in the game when it happened when you're knocking on the door to take a bigger lead you gotta be smarter with the ball. I'm not trying to be hard on Hall because to my eyes he was still the 2nd best qb in preseason but it was a mistake on his part no questions asked. That is a possibility, the other is a mistake on the receiver. The coach will know what the route was. The ball was just "up there". It wasn't going to be a reception without some serious help from the receiver. Helping the QB out on a blitz is part of the receivers job. I'm fine with the decision to put it up there. The connection wasn't made. 50+1 it was on Hall. It's one of the problems with pre-season. 4 different QBs, 17 different receivers of varying talent levels. Little develops in the way of chemistry. Each QB has one or two guys they like to throw to and those guys might not be on the field at the same time. Oline gets crappier as the game goes on.

IE. O'Shea was not happy with Halls int at the end. I finally got around to watching the game and yikes that was a poor decision to make. Eat the sack there and they might win the game. I'm glad that you are finally seeing how mediocre Hall truly is. So please no more comparisons to Ricky Ray and dropping passes into the receivers hands. Halls noodle arm and stone legs simply won't cut it. that's an interesting take on what I said.... quite frankly I think Hall looked OK until that int. I didn't see a whole lot from Brohm that would put him ahead at this point other than the fact that the int was just a brain fart and Brohm didn't make any of those this game so to me Hall is still the #2 guy but I think O'Shea is not happy with losing that game and rightly so, they gave the game away with dropped passes and sloppy tackling and other assorted mistakes. I've found that the only time Hall throws INT's are when he tries to throw as he is being hit. He threw a few like that last year and again in Calgary... Looks to me like the "noodle arm" that gets INT's thrown only comes out when he tries to throw when he should be eating a sack (or when he should've had more time to throw) Not sure that was such a horrible choice though. Assuming your receiver comes up with the ball its a touchdown. If not its most likely an incomplete pass. At worse its intercepted.. which is was.. but I can kinda understand hall throwing the ball. he has limited time to play late in the game and the receivers were dropping catch able passes.. he tried to do it on his own and through it up as he was hit.. should have ate the ball and kicked the field goal.. but i dunno.. i think the majority of the time the reicever breaks off their route when they see the qb in trouble and comes back to the ball. The receiver on that play kept running after the defender stopped as he saw where the ball was going and the reciever then threw up his hands.. Hmmm.. dude, go fight for the ball. The blitz left what looked like man coverage in the back and the receiver had single coverage in the middle of the end zone. Hall put the ball up in the area. I've seen an awful lot of touchdowns scored against us that way.

You can continue to argue that Messam is a better RB than Volny. Being true doesn't make it relevant. Is Messam better than Cotton? Grigsby? Ford? That is who he is competing with for a job. Cotton, Grigsby or Ford. The relevant argument you can make is that the Bombers should not use one of the 4 DI's at the RB position. If you actually have that opinion, then Messam would have value for this team. You would also have an opinion that is not shared by the coach. That is allowed. However, here is why I suspect the coach doesn't share that opinion. It still does nothing to help the ratio problem unless we use him as: a) our starting fulltime RB, or as part of an offensive rotation of starters, say with Swiston at right guard and Feoli-G as a 3rd NI receiver, making 6 NIs on offense for the entire game This is one way of handling the ratio problem. Is it the best way? Who knows. OShea doesn't think so. Why? My guess is that he feels rotating an inferior Olineman, inferior RB, and inferior receiver (relative to their import counterparts) will make Willy's job much more difficult. He wants to make Willy's job as a first year starter as smooth and easy as possible. It's hard to argue against that logic. I'm sure you'll try. Constantly bringing Volny's running abilities into the argument is a red herring. He's still the 3rd string RB whether or not Messam plays here. To continue to bring it up shows you are willfully ignoring the relevant points to argue irrelevant points. Constantly bringing Volny's average special teams abilities into the argument is a red herring. Even if he's a 5 out of 10 as a teams player, Messam is a 0. Volny is in greater danger of losing his job to Brooks than he is to Messam. At least Brooks had the potential to play some snaps on special teams. Messam as starter - addresses ratio but makes us worse. Messam as backup - does not address ratio, still makes us worse. Messam as 3rd string - does not address ratio,makes us better on paper, does not have impact on field, increases payroll. You seem to want Messam as the backup. That doesn't address the ratio and makes us weaker on offense. That's a lousy sales pitch.

Glad you've got it all figured out. Three import OL and two import running backs sounds great. It could be doable but I think it will make the D more weaker since we have to start 3 Nat on D - possibly DT Thomas, CB Bucknor and S Alexander. LG Greaves, C Morley, SB Watson and WR Kohlert on O. RB will be the Returner too. The Bombers are not using 3 imports on the Oline, that is not what I said. I said they explored the idea. Which they did.

I'm merely finding the reasoning behind what OShea has been doing. He has explored various options on offence trying to find out what will give Willy the best chance to succeed. Much like putting lines between each point will hopefully make it easier to process. I have no opposition to Messam being a Bomber. Of course he's a better RB than Volny. Using OShea's reasoning of what will give Willy the best chance to succeed, I can see why he thinks Messam will add no value. You can continue to ignore reasoning. I suspect you will.

Let me do some dot connecting for you. How many decisions has OShea made that revolve around giving Willy the best possible chance to succeed? He has explored the idea of having 3 imports on the Oline. He is apparently using a DI spot on the RB position. He is setting up his first time starting QB to have as much time as possible to find receivers and as little time as possible on his back.

Stating two things that are true does not connect any dots - how would adding Messam help us? Here is the only situation where Messam helps us - both our starting RB and our DI backup RB get injured in the same game. It has happened in Bomber history. In Toronto, 2012, if I recall correctly. We lost both our first and second string QB and our first and second string RB in the same game - lost by a field goal. Nonetheless, it's pretty rare. Once in...ever?

The only NI problem-relief that Messam provides is freeing up a DI spot. He's not a starter anymore. He doesn't solve the ratio problem. He's a backup, and one who doesn't play special teams.

Nope, that is not a waste of a roster spot. That is also not what OShea is talking about. Whatever NI RB is on our roster is going to be our 3rd string RB. Not 2nd. Nope, no one is fixated on Volny's special teams play. Volny is completely replaceable. By another 3rd string RB who plays special teams. Which isn't Messam.

I think Bucknor will be getting a ton of snaps. A DI will be used on a returner, that just won't be his only role. There won't be a Keith Stokes on the team this year. The 3 or 4 guys who will do returns this year will all play lots of snaps on offence and defence.